# Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?



## el bouv (Nov 12, 2012)

Between the wife and myself we have 5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit. 

But the dissatisfaction with Canon’s tardiness is steadily mounting.

On a recent leopard safari the Nikon D4 crowd simply ran away with shots compared to the best our 1D Mk4s could deliver. We are not only talking sensor performance, although we lived like lepers with only ISO 1600 max, the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400. Damn nuisance if you are doing night work, want to work Manual at ISO 1600 with a fill flash and the clever Canon firmware decides that it is time to override your settings. The 1DX has the same problem feature. This could explain why 7 out of the 10 photographers that joined the leopard safari shot Nikon.

Then there is the long wait for the release of partially sorted equipment.

I waited almost 2 years for the 24-70 Mk II lens. The 200-400 lens, as staple for wildlife shooting in the Nikon stable, is yet nowhere in sight. Would also love a 14-24 for landscape work….

All recently released bodies had significant problems and required post release upgrades and firmware replacement.

A lot of noise being made about the 1DX, probably the best copy of a Nikon 3D that Canon ever produced, and is probably marginally better than the D3, I seems a capable camera but only if compared to the previous Nikon model. It is the probably the very best Canon camera but that is a bit like being the most beautiful girl at an all-male party.

IMHO it seems that the constant release of superior Nikon products is forcing Canon’s hand. Canon has since the release of the D300 been in catch up mode and are being forced to announce products that are still on the drawing board, and then have to rush half-baked stuff to market, at prices that exceed the Nikon range.
Has Canon fallen terminally behind? 

My concern is the rate at which the local photo community is switching to Nikon. With profitability already down Canon is yielding significant market share to innovative and high quality Nikon products and that means less money, also for R&D, resulting in less capable kit, resulting in less sales, resulting in less money…..

Should they rather focus on the point and shoot consumer market and leave the high end stuff to professionals?


----------



## PackLight (Nov 12, 2012)

el bouv said:


> My concern is the rate at which the local photo community is switching to Nikon. With profitability already down Canon is yielding significant market share to innovative and high quality Nikon products and that means less money, also for R&D, resulting in less capable kit, resulting in less sales, resulting in less money…..



No doubt you are right. Canon will only make between 3 and 4 billion this year. With profits like that they will be gone in no time.


----------



## el bouv (Nov 12, 2012)

Thanks Privatebydesign

Great review.

The Series 2 Teles are superb!


----------



## Daniel Flather (Nov 12, 2012)

privatebydesign said:


> he now shoots Canon



His gear list is all Nikon, save for the G12.


----------



## EYEONE (Nov 12, 2012)

el bouv said:


> A lot of noise being made about the 1DX, probably the best copy of a Nikon D3 that Canon ever produced, and is better than the D*4*,



There. That's better and more accurate.


----------



## picturesbyme (Nov 12, 2012)

http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/25/canon-announces-q3-2012-results-operating-profit-drops-by-42-pe/

Could be many reasons some might be not available for us yet to see, however I agree that Canon needs to wake- and shake-up its mgmt teams. The artificial dumbing down of products, the overcharging for every little thing that others give for free to their customers are just not cool. 
Canon has great products but they have to acknowledge that they are not the only one.
Plenty of large companies acted like that (GM comes to mind) and couldn't care less what the people wanted to buy until they realized that a large portion of their income comes from the people who they ignore and alienate.... 

They (Canon) also deserve credit for the huge leap they did towards the future.... Canon introduced the pinch-type lens cap! These caps (that cost a few cents) and hoods were standard for other lenses many years before but Canon has seen the light... 10 more years and they will offer free hoods  After that the sky is the limit...

That said I need a little more time until I can complain that my cameras are holding me back 
So I'm heading back to shoot/edit my RAW files because I'm convinced that none can convince me to convince him about something that I'm totally convinced I'm right without being convinced first that I have to convince him...


----------



## pdirestajr (Nov 12, 2012)

What "innovations" has Nikon brought to the table recently? Technology is pretty good these days. If people switch systems every time the competition has a marginally better spec'd product on paper... you'll be spending a LOT of time and money switching back and forth rather than taking photos.


----------



## NormanBates (Nov 12, 2012)

They're surely in bad shape, but I hope they haven't reached that spiral you talk about. Lack of competition is a very very bad thing (and Sony is coming up real fast, but still doesn't count as competition in the very high-end market.


----------



## NormanBates (Nov 12, 2012)

BTW my solution to this "grass is always greener on the other side" dilemma is to make my kit as brand-agnostic as I can. It helps a lot that I shoot mostly video, instead of stills in a safari: since I have to focus manually anyway, I made a point of buying lenses that will work on nearly every brand of body (vintage Leitz primes for the Leica-R mount: awesome glass, real cheap, works on Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and just about anything else).


----------



## Sameer Thawani (Nov 12, 2012)

I can understand the disappointment, but one thing to consider is this: when it comes to specs on paper, I have to admit Nikon beats Canon in quite a few departments. When it comes to real shooting, the ability to take great photographs and have utilities such as dual card slots, the annoying ISO-fixing-at-400 issue a poster talked about, again Nikon seems to be more intelligent. Canon has some catching up to do for sure. 

However, I don't think they are going to be gone anytime soon. They still have a loyal fan following, and you can still get great pro-quality photos with their gear. Although yes, unless management gets its head out of the sand and starts to smell the coffee, they are going to continue losing market share to Nikon in my opinion.


----------



## iso79 (Nov 12, 2012)

Yay, more doom & gloom from gearheads who don't actually take photos :


----------



## sandymandy (Nov 12, 2012)

el bouv said:


> My concern is the rate at which the local photo community is switching to Nikon. With profitability already down Canon is yielding significant market share to innovative and high quality Nikon products and that means less money, also for R&D, resulting in less capable kit, resulting in less sales, resulting in less money…..



Yes right, as the majority of Canon users have fullframe cameras and lots of L lenses...

Ur probably in the top <5% of users with ur gear. 5 Bodies and 16 L lenses u say?

...

Sorry its crying on a VERY high level.

Im running around with mostly old manual focus m42 lenses on my (guess in ur view) "lousy aps-c 1100d eos" cuz i just cant afford anything better. For me it wasnt cheap tough still. If you so unhappy with ur announced-dead canon gear i surely take some of it for free. I think my whole apartement interior isnt even worth enough to buy _one_ L lens.
And anyway if ur that wealthy why dont u just get a Nikon body with a tele lens so u can use it on ur safaris? For the rest u can perhaps keep your down-the-graveyard-spiral canon gear. 

sorry im a bit angry and feel so poor now T_T


----------



## el bouv (Nov 12, 2012)

@iso79

Absolutely correct observation.

Never even been near a shutter release: http://lorettasteyn.blogspot.com/


----------



## candyman (Nov 12, 2012)

el bouv said:


> @iso79
> 
> Absolutely correct observation.
> 
> Never even been near a shutter release: http://lorettasteyn.blogspot.com/




Great shots! Keep up this beautiful work.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 12, 2012)

el bouv said:


> Should they rather focus on the point and shoot consumer market and leave the high end stuff to professionals?



That would surely be one-way a ticket to the graveyard, since the competition from mobile phones is steadily eliminating the entire consumer P&S market.



Sameer Thawani said:


> ....they are going to continue losing market share to Nikon in my opinion.



So, you're saying that Nikon is going to continue their trend of gaining market share from Canon. A trend that has lasted for exactly the one most recent quarter of the last four years. Okay-dokay, we'll see...


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 12, 2012)

If you don't like canon, Well Shoot Nikon. 

If you Don't like Nikon, Well shoot pentax. 

If you don't like pentax, Well Shoot sony.

If you don't like Sony, Err... Shoot Canon?


----------



## jukka (Nov 12, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > Should they rather focus on the point and shoot consumer market and leave the high end stuff to professionals?
> ...



I wonder where you get your figures from, when it comes to sports photographers there has been a shift to Nikon since the first D3 was introduced here in Europe and Canon had problems with theirs sub mirrors in 1dmk3. Nikons selling was increasing with 24% this year if I recall it right

Hey Ho niin hullu se voisi mennä vikaan sub peili


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 12, 2012)

jukka said:


> I wonder where you get your figures from



Canon and Nikon annual/quarterly reports, published on the Investor Relations pages of their corporate websites (pretty much every publicly-held company reports such data).


----------



## dafrank (Nov 12, 2012)

I was going to write a beautifully crafted medium length reply with reasoning so brilliant and persuasive that even the most pessimistic of complainers and Sonikon-centric leaners would instantly put away their fears and negativity. But then, out of the blue, a piece of the gosh-darned sky fell through my roof, landed on my desk and injured my typing finger.

So, having to make this short: don't be so down, don't simply frown, go out and take a picture of that great big shiny world out there. Canon, just like the weather, will surely change, and soon the lovers of other brands will be bemoaning their terrible fate. And, in any case, it's all a silly camera chimera, signifying nothing more than the anxiety of the times manifest in a new world-wide team sport - consumer product technical development gaming, set in offical international leagues with avid fanclub members voicing their opinion about, and concern with, being "left behind" all the time and everywhere.

As to the future, only the Oracles of Sparta really know and they won't tell us a thing without some very old drachmae and a really developed set of abs.

Regards,
David


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 12, 2012)

A thoughtful analysis of sales and profits by quarter over the past 4 or 5 years might be some actual data that would support such a theory.
Just stating a unsupported opinion as fact is not very impressive and leavs a trollish taste in my mouth.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Nov 12, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Just stating a unsupported opinion as fact is not very impressive and leavs a trollish taste in my mouth.



Unsupported opinion as fact is acceptable, 47% of people are aware of this and accept it.


----------



## aznable (Nov 12, 2012)

picturesbyme said:


> http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/25/canon-announces-q3-2012-results-operating-profit-drops-by-42-pe/



nikon got a similar drop in the first six months of the FY...the profit in 6 months are 66% of canon profits in the quarter

first quarter of nikon

Three months ended June 30, 2012
259,431 5.6
23,368 (36.7)
23,403 (38.0)
15,770 (48.6)

profits dropped by 48.6%

six months of FY
First Half ended September 30, 2012
497,243 2.2
37,103 (39.3)
39,524 (39.3)
32,022 (36.5)

in usd the net income is 402.930.000 in six months

profits for canon's terrible quarter are 630.875.000

another strong quarter of nikon , and in 9 months they will catch the terrible quarter of canon


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 12, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Just stating a unsupported opinion as fact is not very impressive and leavs a trollish taste in my mouth.
> ...


Well, there do seem to be plenty who believe that way. I guess that having worked for now Ford CEO Allen Mulally, I was brainwashed into being a data driven manager


----------



## kdsand (Nov 12, 2012)

ah
1st off , people jump to fast. We know canon & nikon leap frog or as least pace each other. For a pro an edge in a given year might be crucial but not so much for the rest of us.
2nd what's up with having an issue with firmware / updates? That seem like a non issue to me, i like updates. 
Canon does have their head stuck in the sand in some irritating ways like caps & hoods but its getting better.


----------



## kdsand (Nov 12, 2012)

sandymandy said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > My concern is the rate at which the local photo community is switching to Nikon. With profitability already down Canon is yielding significant market share to innovative and high quality Nikon products and that means less money, also for R&D, resulting in less capable kit, resulting in less sales, resulting in less money…..
> ...



I feel your pain. Especially when it sounds like a weekend warrior with tens of thousands of dollar in toys.


----------



## dr croubie (Nov 12, 2012)

NormanBates said:


> (vintage Leitz primes for the Leica-R mount: awesome glass, real cheap...)



Where the hell are you getting Leica R primes "real cheap". They're some of the most expensive per age lenses anywhere (eclipsed only by Leica M glass). If you've got a source, I'd love a 19mm for less than $700 please.


----------



## gmrza (Nov 12, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > Should they rather focus on the point and shoot consumer market and leave the high end stuff to professionals?
> ...



Canon will also be acutely aware of any gains Nikon makes. For instance, the D3s certainly had an advantage over the 1DmkIV. By all of the accounts I have seen, the 1Dx and D4 seem to be close enough to each other that any difference is academic.

Canon has certainly jumped ahead in the flash department with the 600-EX-RT and ST-E3. Nikon does not have anything like that yet. (It is a matter of time, I believe.)

Nikon still has not caught up in terms of the depth and breadth of lens selection Canon has.

Either way, competition is good, and innovation from Nikon will push Canon - and vice versa. I doubt that anyone would be making a mistake right now choosing either Canon or Nikon. Both of them make their slip-ups, but on average, both are putting some pretty damn awesome products into the market. - The choice probably really comes down to personal preference.

The sad thing in this market is that, if you want a full frame DSLR, there are only two games in town. Everybody else has left the room and only Canon and Nikon are playing. That is the real tragedy of the market today. A serious third player (and Sony really doesn't count right now) would make a big difference, and keep Canon and Nikon on their toes.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Nov 12, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Daniel Flather said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...


----------



## NormanBates (Nov 12, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> NormanBates said:
> 
> 
> > (vintage Leitz primes for the Leica-R mount: awesome glass, real cheap...)
> ...



$400 to $800 for a such a nice lens is "real cheap" to me: my 35mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4 and 90mm f/2.8 are outstanding lenses, probably better than anything Canon has to offer at at least twice the price (of course, Canon glass would have AF... but then again, it wouldn't work on a Nikon, Sony, Pentax, etc).

OTOH, I'm not sure the 19mm will be THAT nice. In fact I didn't even get the 24mm or 28mm: wide angles have improved a lot with computer design, old ones are usually way too soft in the corners.


----------



## Kernuak (Nov 12, 2012)

privatebydesign said:


> Daniel Flather said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...


He was certainly very public in his criticism of Canon cameras after his switch and would take every opportunity to joke about how bad they were in his talks, so I can see why he wouldn't want to shout too much this time. Incidentally, I spoke to someone else recently who said that since he reviewed the 1D X and then had it again for a second trial, Andy won't shoot with anything else. There have also been other Nikon shooters (including those who never used Canon) who have been considering switching (at least according to what they say on the web) since the 1D X and D4 were released. On the other side, someone that Andy was and is inspired by, Laurie Campbell, is still a committed Nikon shooter. Laurie has shot Nikon since the days of film, but he is also only interested in the right tools for him and not relatively minor technological advances.


----------



## distant.star (Nov 12, 2012)

.
I don't know about Canon, but my brother has a nasty cold.

I sure hope he hasn't entered the graveyard spiral!!


----------



## Kernuak (Nov 12, 2012)

distant.star said:


> .
> I don't know about Canon, but my brother has a nasty cold.
> 
> I sure hope he hasn't entered the graveyard spiral!!


Depends whether its Asian flu or not .


----------



## Plato the Wise (Nov 12, 2012)

Sounds like a personal problem.

Doesn't the 1d M4's native ISO range from 100-12800? Why would you be "limited" to 1600 ISO?

And if you are "limited" by auto flash ISO stuck on 400 ISO - switch it manually.

Sounds like a lot of whining and not enough thinking.

And as others have said - I don't think Canon will be going out of business any time soon.


----------



## Zlatko (Nov 12, 2012)

el bouv said:


> ..., the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400. Damn nuisance if you are doing night work, want to work Manual at ISO 1600 with a fill flash and the clever Canon firmware decides that it is time to override your settings. The 1DX has the same problem feature. This could explain why 7 out of the 10 photographers that joined the leopard safari shot Nikon.


The original post has far too much erroneous doom & gloom for me to address, so I'll write about just one topic. The fitting of a flash to the 1D4 or any Canon EOS camera only forces the ISO to 400 if one is using Auto ISO or the green program mode. Why someone would feel this is a problem or limitation of the cameras is dumbfounding. The obvious answer is: don't use Auto ISO with flash. Remember that ISO can be set manually. Remember what we did before cameras had Auto ISO. Indeed, from the dawn of the film era through most of the digital era, the photographer set the ISO, either manually or via choice of film. Once set manually, the ISO stays set, flash or no flash. Auto ISO works _great_ without flash. And flash works _great_ with manual ISO. There is simply no problem with any of this. If this is putting a damper on someone's leopard safari, or making photographers switch to Nikon, well, they must be Auto-ISO-only shooters, which is rather oddly self-limiting.


----------



## Patrick (Nov 12, 2012)

A good photographer with a cheap camera and a kit lens will produce better and more interesting images than an unskilled/creatively challenged photographer using a 1Dx or a D4 with a wide selection of quality glass. This is because a good photographer, while aware of the limitations of the equipment, will work in such a way as to maximise the quality of his images while his/her unskilled counterpart is still trying to work out what I just said and wondering if they should feel insulted or praised!


----------



## Patrick (Nov 12, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > he now shoots Canon
> ...



@Daniel...just had a look at Andy Rouse's site - his latest blog post (29th October 2012) include the following:

_Anyway for now this will be all as I want to get it loaded up, all taken with 1DX, macro, 300 2.8 and various flash....._

So it looks like he had indeed gotten back into at least some Canon gear as well as/instead of Nikon.


----------



## tnargs (Nov 12, 2012)

el bouv said:


> @iso79
> 
> Absolutely correct observation.
> 
> Never even been near a shutter release: http://lorettasteyn.blogspot.com/



dear oh me, I can see your problem. The sooner you change to Nikon the better.


----------



## dtaylor (Nov 12, 2012)

el bouv said:


> On a recent leopard safari the Nikon D4 crowd simply ran away with shots compared to the best our 1D Mk4s could deliver. We are not only talking sensor performance, although we lived like lepers with only ISO 1600 max, the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400.



While I do not question the flash issue, I couldn't help but laugh at the rest of your post.

* It's nonsense (or troll bait) to suggest that the 1D4 cannot shoot higher than ISO 1600.

* No way a D4 user should "run away" from a 1D4 user purely because of the camera. The D4 is newer/better, but simply not by any great amount.

* If Auto ISO wasn't working for me on a trip like that, I wouldn't use it, and no D4 user would "run away" from me.



> All recently released bodies had significant problems and required post release upgrades and firmware replacement.



No, they did not.



> A lot of noise being made about the 1DX, probably the best copy of a Nikon 3D that Canon ever produced, and is probably marginally better than the D3, I seems a capable camera but only if compared to the previous Nikon model.



Absolute nonsense. It is clearly competitive with the D4.



> My concern is the rate at which the local photo community is switching to Nikon. With profitability already down Canon is yielding significant market share to innovative and high quality Nikon products and that means less money, also for R&D, resulting in less capable kit, resulting in less sales, resulting in less money…..



Last time I saw stats Canon still held #1 market share position. Do you have newer info? Source?



> Should they rather focus on the point and shoot consumer market and leave the high end stuff to professionals?



TROLL ALERT


----------



## bycostello (Nov 13, 2012)

wkth fuji, olympus and sony all nipping at their heels they better get to grips with stuff soon.... the canon m may of sold well... but if falls massivly short of what you'd expect.....


----------



## Zv (Nov 13, 2012)

No speedliter in their right mind uses auto ISO. How is that an issue? And I would hardly call the 1DX and 5D mk III "half baked". Canon are taking their time with lens releases to get them right. I'm sure when the 200-400 comes out it will rock. 

I don't understand this Nikon were running away with it comment either. Either you get the shot based on your skill and experience or you don't because of user error or luck. Only a bad photog blames equipment. 

When was the last time you needed 35 megapixels? Am fine with 18 and even 21 seems like too much, I'm always sizing down files, which is fine I like the flexibility. 

I do wish Canon had better high ISO performance but it's not a big deal, just use noise red software and get on with it. 

Nikon make great gear, Canon makes great gear. we should be greatful there is choice instead of complaining about it!


----------



## pwp (Nov 13, 2012)

Graveyard spiral? 
That emotive stuff...
Wait...there's a distinct smell of troll in the air.

-PW


----------



## Harv (Nov 13, 2012)

I wish I was in a graveyard spiral just like Canon.


----------



## Nishi Drew (Nov 13, 2012)

Ahh yes, OP is complaining that Canon has been pathetically behind since the D300, a now 5 year old camera. Why haven't you switched five years ago then? Obviously smart enough to see that Canon was behind and would remain behind and useless because you can't figure out how to set your bloody ISO!!... oh wait... troll bait....?
If only I could lavish in those L glass and 1D bodies... well then the tech will be better than what I am capable of I'll admit that, I'm happy with the more-than-capable 5DII and my Siggy lenses, the direction of manufacturers based on their top-speced gear matters to the few that will actually be able to make such an investment, so by the time (if ever, of course) Canon can meet or exceed Sonikon then I might be able to actually purchase good tech, and in the mean time it's time take more pictures.


----------



## rpt (Nov 13, 2012)

picturesbyme said:


> That said I need a little more time until I can complain that my cameras are holding me back
> So I'm heading back to shoot/edit my RAW files because I'm convinced that none can convince me to convince him about something that I'm totally convinced I'm right without being convinced first that I have to convince him...


LOL! You convinced me too. Off to shoot some pics with my 100L


----------



## tron (Nov 13, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > ..., the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400. Damn nuisance if you are doing night work, want to work Manual at ISO 1600 with a fill flash and the clever Canon firmware decides that it is time to override your settings. The 1DX has the same problem feature. This could explain why 7 out of the 10 photographers that joined the leopard safari shot Nikon.
> ...


You couldn't have said it better. I was about to mention that maybe, just maybe an average or above average DSLR shooter can set the ISO to manual : (especially a 1D series user ... ;D )


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 13, 2012)

tron said:


> You couldn't have said it better. I was about to mention that maybe, just maybe an average or above average DSLR shooter can set the ISO to manual : (especially a 1D series user ... ;D )



Meh. I haven't taken a picture since getting my 1D X. I've read the manual over and over, and I can't seem to find anything like the green square setting I used on all my other dSLRs. I gave up and just use my S100 now.


----------



## tron (Nov 13, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > You couldn't have said it better. I was about to mention that maybe, just maybe an average or above average DSLR shooter can set the ISO to manual : (especially a 1D series user ... ;D )
> ...


 ;D


----------



## PackLight (Nov 13, 2012)

el bouv said:


> @iso79
> 
> Absolutely correct observation.
> 
> Never even been near a shutter release: http://lorettasteyn.blogspot.com/



Have you ever pushed the ISO button on top of your camera and manually set your ISO?
Not a big deal at all.
How about this, go to C.Fn I 3 and set your highest ISO to 3200, 6400 or even 12,800?
You were not limited to ISO 1600. 

Your complaints are either from lack of experience with the camera, or you are one of the paid/ or non paid Nikon fanboy trolls stiring up false information.


----------



## sandymandy (Nov 13, 2012)

I know i shouldnt but.....i still feel angry now after reading the thread again


----------



## Ben Taylor (Nov 13, 2012)

Give the OP a break. He's probably left handed and can't articulate pressing the ISO button. 

If he switches to Nikon he might be able to get a hold of Ken Rockwell's left handed Nikon F100 and then he'll be able to change ISO... but wait... the F100 takes film... oh no... but... wait... err... aaaarrrrrrghghghgh!!!!!


----------



## symmar22 (Nov 13, 2012)

sandymandy said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > My concern is the rate at which the local photo community is switching to Nikon. With profitability already down Canon is yielding significant market share to innovative and high quality Nikon products and that means less money, also for R&D, resulting in less capable kit, resulting in less sales, resulting in less money…..
> ...



I feel you Mandy, thanks to bring back a bit of financial reality here. It's mainly about boys crying about their (expensive) toys. Well I agree sometimes I cry a bit as well, but thank you to remind us we should be happy to have a camera and to be able to actually make some pictures.

On the other hand, you must understand; this person has realized too late that the trendy colors for safaris changed from white/red to black/gold this year. And as you know a gentleman can not afford such an error of taste :


----------



## NormanBates (Nov 13, 2012)

PackLight said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > @iso79
> ...



I very much aggree with what you're saying in the first paragraph: the ISO is yours to control, not to be set by the camera. Just like everything else.

But once you start talking about people paid to troll the forums... sorry, you're paranoid.


----------



## rpt (Nov 13, 2012)

Kernuak said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


I am sorry to break this to you. Everybody on this thread and others alive are in a graveyard spiral! It is inevitable 
At most you can delay it a bit. So my philosophy is to take pictures and refine my technique 
That way I can have some skills in the afterlife.


----------



## sandymandy (Nov 13, 2012)

symmar22 said:


> I feel you Mandy, thanks to bring back a bit of financial reality here. It's mainly about boys crying about their (expensive) toys. Well I agree sometimes I cry a bit as well, but thank you to remind us we should be happy to have a camera and to be able to actually make some pictures.
> 
> On the other hand, you must understand; this person has realized too late that the trendy colors for safaris changed from white/red to black/gold this year. And as you know a gentleman can not afford such an error of taste :



Many times i just feel so grateful for everything i have in my life but at the same time i feel like i dont deserve anything of it. Sometimes im ashamed of being able to have a camera at all while other people in the world have just themselves and nothing else. Everytime i come here to the forums it just clashes with my inner feelings and puts me on an emotional rollercoaster. Sure i also want L lenses since theyre really awesome but then i feel ashamed again of not being happy with what i got. Anyway i wont read this thread anymore and try to calm down.


----------



## symmar22 (Nov 13, 2012)

You're absolutely right, I guess this is the fate of our societies, we never have enough..... Even people who can afford safaris in Africa with 16 L lenses are not happy. But that should not be a reference in any case, I've been on my own traveling enough to see starving people enough, when I start to behave indecently, that very thought puts me back in line. Do not be ashamed of your so called social status, or your income level, there is simply no reason for it. Keep enjoying life as you do, have fun making nice pictures with what you have, if someday you can afford a lens upgrade that brings you something, then go for it. The most important is who you are and what you do, not what you own. I think all this whining about equipment (I confess I am part of it sometimes) just shows how unfulfilled our lives are. When I was 16, I was offered an Olympus OM-10 with a 50mm 1.8, I was never as happy as with that simple rig.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Nov 13, 2012)

symmar22 said:


> You're absolutely right, I guess this is the fate of our societies, we never have enough..... Even people who can afford safaris in Africa with 16 L lenses are not happy. But that should not be a reference in any case, I've been on my own traveling enough to see starving people enough, when I start to behave indecently, that very thought puts me back in line. Do not be ashamed of your so called social status, or your income level, there is simply no reason for it. Keep enjoying life as you do, have fun making nice pictures with what you have, if someday you can afford a lens upgrade that brings you something, then go for it. The most important is who you are and what you do, not what you own. I think all this whining about equipment (I confess I am part of it sometimes) just shows how unfulfilled our lives are. When I was 16, I was offered an Olympus OM-10 with a 50mm 1.8, I was never as happy as with that simple rig.



Gotta agree with you here. We need some perspective here. Taking pictures is fun and for some of us a or the main source of income. For me a very small part though. I maybe know 25% of what my body can do but I think I can capture some really good images with it anyway. The first pictures I sold with an article was with a 4MP Minolta (I think) P&S, the guys at the mag wasn't all happy but still liked them. Goes to show that content rules.


----------



## And-Rew (Nov 13, 2012)

"the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400. Damn nuisance if you are doing night work"

So why aren't you working with the flash and ISO in full manual mode?

You and your wife have a hefty collection of Canon gear that most pro's would give their right arm for - yet you don't know how to work with flash in manual mode?

With that statement in mind, i would suggest it's not the camera that's the problem - it's the user!

If i can shoot Badgers at 22:00 on a British winters evening with a 30D and 5D2 with out any issue - fairly confident you should be able to set things up with a 1D series to use on a safari! 

As for the 1DX - with its gorgeous high ISO capabilities - one has to question why you would want flash ???


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Nov 13, 2012)

I don't want to get all emotional here, but just to emphasize my other post, there are people who have other concerns than something about Canon (that I can't really remember) the OP mentioned. I took this pictures last Sunday on a morning walk.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 13, 2012)

NormanBates said:


> But once you start talking about people paid to troll the forums... sorry, you're paranoid.



Why yes I am. But to believe such tactics do not happen could also be a bit naive.
I guess the elections aren't far enough behind us here in the US and dirty politics is still fresh in our mind. :-\


----------



## rpt (Nov 13, 2012)

Two things:

1. Canon had better release or announce some cameras soon as people are getting spiritual and emotional on this thread.

2. As I write the point above in the comfort of my home, my stomach full, I realise that I don't have to worry about where my next meals will be coming from. So in a way I seem to have won the lottery and the odds were probably better than a million to one...

Hell, Canon had better announce some cameras soon


----------



## candyman (Nov 13, 2012)

Hobby Shooter said:


> I don't want to get all emotional here, but just to emphasize my other post, there are people who have other concerns than something about Canon (that I can't really remember) the OP mentioned. I took this pictures last Sunday on a morning walk.




I hope you did more than just taking the pictures


----------



## AprilForever (Nov 13, 2012)

el bouv said:


> Between the wife and myself we have 5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit.
> 
> But the dissatisfaction with Canon’s tardiness is steadily mounting.
> 
> ...



Remember the D800 autofocus problems? Read Thom Hogan's blog...


----------



## distant.star (Nov 13, 2012)

.
With thoughts of the approaching Thanksgiving holiday here in the U.S. (unfortunately too many thoughts of "Black Friday" sales), it's nice to see this thread take a turn toward appreciating what we have. While some people have very little, others have had everything taken from them.

I was in Camden, NJ yesterday where 58 people have been murdered so far this year. Given total population, that would be as if nearly 6000 people had been murdered in New York City. An activist group has planted crosses in front of Camden City Hall symbolizing these deaths -- people for whom a D800 or a 1Dx no longer mean anything.


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 13, 2012)

el bouv said:


> Between the wife and myself we have 5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit.
> ...



Lets see the Nikon crap capture this image at ISO 25K from a helicopter.






Sounds to me most of the better shooter just happened to be using Nikon


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Nov 13, 2012)

i do so love the hyperbole here on this forum at times. The OP and many of the comments leands me to post this from SNL - 

http://youtu.be/ybDKfGEw4aU

yup, the one where gear heads complaining about the iphone5 are confronted with the peasant laborers from china who make it. 

Shall I play the violin for you? You have "5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit." WTF?????? I guess you want your camera to sponge bathe you and and make you breakfast too? " although we lived like lepers with only ISO 1600 max, the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400." How does someone buy 5 canon bodies and not read the manual for even 1 of them? The last time I was bound to ISO 1600 was on my first DSLR, my XSI. The 1dmk4 held it's own really well at high ISO's above 3200, one of the best low light cam's in canons lineup until the mk3 and 1dx came out.

I'm sorry, this is soooo....I've got 1st world problems that it makes me kind of sick.


----------



## tron (Nov 14, 2012)

I didn't even try Auto ISO until I got my 5DMkIII (previous cameras were 40D which unfortunately was stolen and subsequently 5DMkII). Coming from the film era, having the ability to choose the ISO in the digital cameras is more than enough for me.


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 14, 2012)

tron said:


> I didn't even try Auto ISO until I got my 5DMkIII (previous cameras were 40D which unfortunately was stolen and subsequently 5DMkII). Coming from the film era, having the ability to choose the ISO in the digital cameras is more than enough for me.



Shush... Clearly this is a person who has not discovered "M", "TV" and "AV" modes.


----------



## friedmud (Nov 14, 2012)

As someone that just switched to Nikon for the D600 I agree with some of the OP's sentiment... But he is way off in 2 areas:

1. No way this is a "Death Spiral". Canon has had some trouble with execution lately (look at the time between announcement and availability for most of their new stuff for instance) but they are still making big profits and selling tons of gear.

2. Auto ISO and Flash?!? Those are two words that don't belong together. Don't get me wrong... I love the Auto ISO on my D600. It is infinitely more usable than on my 7D because of all of the ways you can customize and restrict it. However: flashes should never be used with Auto ISO.

When using a flash you have a 4th variable outside of the normal shutter speed, aperture and ISO exposure triangle: flash intensity. I've found that flash photography is best done in manual mode where you select the shutter speed you need to freeze the action (generally), the aperture you want for DoF you want, and the ISO you want for the amount of "background fill" (ie, how light or dark the rest of the scene will be in relation to your main subject). THEN allow the camera to choose the correct amount of flash to properly expose your main subject.

Auto ISO and speedlights just doesn't make sense to me at all...


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Nov 14, 2012)

candyman said:


> Hobby Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > I don't want to get all emotional here, but just to emphasize my other post, there are people who have other concerns than something about Canon (that I can't really remember) the OP mentioned. I took this pictures last Sunday on a morning walk.
> ...


Well that is sort of the reason we live in a country like this. My wife works with international development within human rights and rule of law. These children are not starving, they are homeless. If they are not picked up by a children's protection organisation they are ******* to a life of crime and drugs though. My helping them with money of food wouldn't make a difference. One difference I can make is to publish a picture like that to make more people aware of what's going on in the world. That is in my view one of the tasks for photographers. I am not professional, but get some stuff published on occasion. This picture happens to be taken with my 5D3 but to deliver the message any tool could have been used. Auto ISO or not.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Nov 14, 2012)

AprilForever said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > Between the wife and myself we have 5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit.
> ...



Yep, I was at a owls in flight workshop a few months back (just after the 1DX was released). There were two 1DX's in use, and a chap with a D4...who gave up and went back to his backup D3 due to regular camera lockups. Both 1DX's performed flawlessly, as did my 5DIII. Another chap had a D800 and he kept missing shots, although I'd put that down to poor technique than the camera. The current Canon kit is easily the best currently available. 
Back to the OP, I think it's unfair to compare a 1D4 with a D4. They are two different generations of cameras. I think a D3 vs 1D4 or D4 vs 1DX is more fair.


----------



## steliosk (Nov 14, 2012)

of course canon entered the graveyard long time ago..

- insane expensive equipment
- MANY less features comparing to nikon gear
- slow production rate.. anouncing outdated products before even released (check 6D vs D600)
D600 is out and selling like crazy, while canon 6D hasn't even produced from the factories with half the features rumored at the same price

Canon sensors are crappy lower DR ISO,
and of course you can "do" photography with a cheap camera as well BUT in the terms of quality and budget, Nikon offers MUCH more features and canon just follows 

The most revolutionary Canon product ever was 5D mark 2 back in 2007-2008. Canon died after that.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2012)

steliosk said:


> of course canon entered the graveyard long time ago..
> 
> The most revolutionary Canon product ever was 5D mark 2 back in 2007-2008. Canon died after that.



If that's true, Canon is market-dominating zombie.


----------



## Skulker (Nov 14, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> steliosk said:
> 
> 
> > of course canon entered the graveyard long time ago..
> ...



;D well said neuro


----------



## robbymack (Nov 14, 2012)

Hobby Shooter said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > Hobby Shooter said:
> ...



Really? helping with money or food wouldn't make a difference? Even if for just that day? your lack of compassion is staggering...keep on shooting that $3500 camera


----------



## kubelik (Nov 14, 2012)

Well that was a great dose of morning comedy. I've taken shots of running cheetahs with a 5d mark II and a 70-200 on a 2x extender. Definitely did not get all keepers, but definitely did not feel like a leper. I would imagine a 1d mark IV and 300 would be a massive jump up in keeper rate, and if you disagree I will be happy to help you offload defective equipment. Also, I'm left handed and I still know how to push the ISO button.


----------



## jukka (Nov 14, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> steliosk said:
> 
> 
> > of course canon entered the graveyard long time ago..
> ...



not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2012)

jukka said:


> not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back



Sorry, I wasn't aware that Canon sold sensors. I thought they sold cameras.


----------



## jukka (Nov 14, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back
> ...



there is a small detail inside the cameras called sensor, earlier it was something called film

Hän ei ole tyhmä, hän on aivan onneton kuin hän ajattelee.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2012)

jukka said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > jukka said:
> ...



Did Canon make film? Obviously, dSLRs contain sensors. : 

My point is that a naked sensor does a very bad job of capturing and storing an image. Things like a viewfinder, autofocus system, mirror/shutter assembly, processor(s), etc., are important parts of the product. The sensor is not the product, and to focus exclusively on the sensor and by extension, imply that the rest of the camera is of no more importance than the cardboard box used to package the camera, is ridiculous. You take pictures, right? Disassemble your camera and remove the sensor, then take that sensor out into the Finnish countryside and shoot some pictures. Let us know how that works out for you. 

R&D yen are finite, not infinite. A company must decide how best (for them) to allocate those yen. Look at car manufacturers - comparing models over time, despite a new model coming out each year, not everything about that new model is updated each cycle. Last year saw the model updated with a continuously variable transmission, but the engine was the same. This year, the body style may be updated. Next year, maybe a new suspension and quad-zone climate control. The engine won't be updated until the 2015 model comes out.

Your suggestion that their sensor division has 'fallen asleep' needs to be put into the context of an overall product development strategy, or you fall into the trap of assuming that the thing that's most important to you is important to all consumers. We're all aware that there is a vocal group of individuals who are dissatisfied with Canon sensors, particularly with their DR when compared to Nikon. Fine. In the past couple of years, there has been a shift away from megapixels in marketing and popular view - I've frequently read that, "ISO is the new megapixles," and statements to that effect. Maybe someday, DR will be the new ISO. BUt we're not there yet. The market shows that the vocal group complaining about comparatively poor DR of Canon sensors is a small minority (as evinced by the fact that Canon sensors have trailed 
Nikon sensors on DR for a few years, years in which Nikon lost market share to Canon).

Looking at sales performance over time, Canon was the market leader a few years ago, and remains the market leader. For most of quarters in the last few years, they have gained market share, not lost it - despite being 'asleep' in terms of sensor progress. That says to me, and quite likely to Canon as well, that their strategy has been successful. Most of their recent models, at the higher end at least, have offered minor improvements in sensor IQ, coupled with major improvements in performance (AF, frame rate, etc.).


----------



## MarkII (Nov 14, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> R&D yen are finite, not infinite. A company must decide how best (for them) to allocate those yen.


An interesting question is why Canon made new silicon for the 5DIII, given that it performs almost identically to the 5DII. They could have just cleaned up the signal routing to the A/Ds and maybe added a new micro-lens array to improve the sensitivity a little.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2012)

MarkII said:


> An interesting question is why Canon made new silicon for the 5DIII, given that it performs almost identically to the 5DII. They could have just cleaned up the signal routing to the A/Ds and maybe added a new micro-lens array to improve the sensitivity a little.



I assume so it's "new"...


----------



## PackLight (Nov 14, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Despite Canon building a great camera, having great lenses and even if Canon did fall behind on sensors Canon did have a obvious major failure that has caused Canon owners to swarm to Nikon;

As the OP has pointed out to us Canon failed to make it simple and educate 1D IV owners who are obviously to busy to read the manual on how to push the ISO button to change ISO when using a flash. They also failed in explaining how to adust your Auto ISO settings. 

Also CAJ has a PE ratio of 12. this morning. If we can beat it up to 10 I am going to buy a few more shares.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2012)

PackLight said:


> ...obvious major failure that has caused Canon owners to swarm to Nikon;
> 
> As the OP has pointed out to us Canon failed to make it simple and educate 1D IV owners who are obviously to busy to read the manual on how to push the ISO button to change ISO when using a flash. They also failed in explaining how to adust your Auto ISO settings.



Even worse, when they released the 1D X, they made the ISO button physically smaller, meaning even someone who actually read the manual and knew about the ISO button may not be able to find it to press it. Canon FAIL.


----------



## 7enderbender (Nov 14, 2012)

el bouv said:


> Between the wife and myself we have 5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit.
> 
> But the dissatisfaction with Canon’s tardiness is steadily mounting.
> 
> ...




See, in my opinion all this doesn't matter much from a business perspective. Not to say that you don't have valid points or to diminish you being annoyed since your needs are not met. On the other hand, I doubt that Nikon is really that different. Maybe some of their difference coincide with your specific needs for whatever reason, but generally it's pretty much all the same.

And pro and and prosumer cameras is not where their money is. Yes, they got lucky and sold a lot of 5DII bodies. Maybe that even increased the number of people going for L glass - though I'm not even convinced that their profit margin on those is that much higher. Yes, they want happy pros and semi pros, that's why they are jumping through all the expensive hoops. But they make money by selling you printers, medical equipment and point and shoot cameras. Sure, this may all change. And it may change for worse, if this model gets threatened. There may not be many /relative/ affordable camera gear left that meet your standards half-way. don't believe me? Go out and try to buy a computer today that is pro-grade yet affordable. Doesn't really exist. Apple or Lenovo buyers these days are all consumer oriented and that's what you get. If you want or need more you shell out big chunks of money. So there may well be a time when pro-grade camera means little specialty manufacturers like the Leicas or Hasselblads of our world.

We might want to enjoy what's available to us while it lasts. I'm actually pretty happy overall and can't really understand why people complain about high ISO performance and such. For the most part I would argue that nobody really need this. Decades of excellent wildlife (and other) pictures shot on 400 ISO film are proof to me. But then again, I'm not really the safari/Africa tourist to begin with so what do I know. I'd pay to be nowhere near such a thing.


----------



## natureshots (Nov 14, 2012)

robbymack said:


> Hobby Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > candyman said:
> ...



Your stupidity is staggering. You have obviously not spent much time in an urban area. The number of homeless people are enormous. I have bought homeless people food and it makes a small difference in one of the thousands of homeless people's lives just in that city. Mostly it just made me feel better about my life and did very little to stem the tide of homelessness in Boston. Publicly displayed pictures or working for a human rights organization does so much more. A picture can inspire others to do something for the homeless people they pass every day.

So how much time have you spent working at your local soup kitchen? What do you volunteer your time for besides ignorant attacks on the internet. I volunteer a good deal of my time for local conservation efforts. I feel it is better way to make an impact on the future of the human race than helping with the homeless. You can argue that but you will not convince me otherwise. What do you do with your time and money robbymack Theresa that puts you in a position to judge others? (I just supplied my credentials to judge you)


----------



## tron (Nov 14, 2012)

MarkII said:


> An interesting question is why Canon made new silicon for the 5DIII, given that it performs almost identically to the 5DII. They could have just cleaned up the signal routing to the A/Ds and maybe added a new micro-lens array to improve the sensitivity a little.


They made one dimension 3 times 1920 (5760) pixels so as to make 3X3 pixel binning in video


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Nov 14, 2012)

PackLight said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > jukka said:
> ...



+1


----------



## jrh (Nov 14, 2012)

Also CAJ has a PE ratio of 12. this morning. If we can beat it up to 10 I am going to buy a few more shares.
[/quote]

If any company is on the brink of a "graveyard spiral" it is Sony. P/E performance is negative and setting 52 week low on share prices. Does not bode well for investment in developing future technology and retaining top talent. Canon is still making a profit. Btw - if Nikon is doing soo well it is definitely NOT reflected in their share prices.


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 14, 2012)

Maui5150 said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > Between the wife and myself we have 5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit.
> ...



I'm pretty sure a D4 would have no trouble with taking a shot like that
in fact I'm pretty certain Joe Mcnally has published similar aerial shots taken from helicopters using D3s


----------



## Ben Taylor (Nov 14, 2012)

If Sony hits the graveyard will Nikon follow then? If everyone's so adamant that Nikon's better because of their sensor performance and they use Sony sensors they might be forced to put Canon sensors in ;D 

I'm sure Canon would be supportive though and let them use the original 1D sensor for a reasonable price.


----------



## Zlatko (Nov 14, 2012)

7enderbender said:


> We might want to enjoy what's available to us while it lasts. I'm actually pretty happy overall and can't really understand why people complain about high ISO performance and such. For the most part I would argue that nobody really need this. Decades of excellent wildlife (and other) pictures shot on 400 ISO film are proof to me. But then again, I'm not really the safari/Africa tourist to begin with so what do I know. I'd pay to be nowhere near such a thing.


I agree with you on enjoying what's available while it lasts. I'm pretty happy overall too. High ISO performance is better than ever before. When I shoot the 5D2 and the 5D3 at ISO 6400 and compare the results, it is very clear that Canon has not been asleep. Instead, they have delivered better high ISO performance (among many other improvements) — in response to the wishes of many photographers. In the world of night-time indoor event photography, every bit of high ISO performance makes a difference (think candle light and other low light situations). We can work without flash where flash was previously required. And when we work with flash, less flash is needed — our flash travels farther and our flash batteries last longer. We can capture action more easily. And we can capture the ambiance better. Of course, we still have to remember when to set the ISO manually.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Nov 15, 2012)

natureshots said:


> robbymack said:
> 
> 
> > Hobby Shooter said:
> ...


@robbymack, I don't know how much time you've spent in third world countries, I have spent the better part of the last ten years in this part of the world and believe me when I say that giving food to someone in a situation like that makes very little change, maybe it makes you feel better for the moment but it has no long term impact whatsoever, maybe it might even have negative impact for a number of reasons.
@natureshots, thanks for your comment, I do agree with you that there are much more efficient ways to go about this, one big problem in countries like this is the fact that the government does nothing to help, there are no systems or institutions in place to deal with the problems, furthermore it is only one of all the gigantic problems they are facing.

Well this was off the subject, but nevertheless puts in perspective the OP's comment. I can see why people see that Canon don't meet their needs, but that probably goes for Nikon users also. I've been active there asking for lens picks for a friend's daughter and from what I've read there are similar issues within the Nikon camp. Goes to show we're never happy with what we have maybe.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Nov 16, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > he now shoots Canon
> ...



Yes that is true. He is begging borrowing Canon stuff as his D4 and D800 do not work properly/reliably. Nikon cannot fix these cameras.


----------



## Louis (Nov 16, 2012)

candyman said:


> el bouv said:
> 
> 
> > @iso79
> ...




Nice work,

I agree with you, Canon are losing me also


----------



## jukka (Nov 16, 2012)

johnf3f said:


> Daniel Flather said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...




as his D4 and D800 do not work properly/reliably?

in what way?


Here is a true story, on a long-term phenomenon and who many seems to have forgotten


Beijing Olympics.
One of the best sports photographers seek Canon service tent for the third time, the photographer does not get as sharp images as his colleagues who use Nikon equipment. After visit the service tent 3 times he got a straight answer, what do you expect, it's a Canon.
The photographer wanders off to Nikon and borrow 2 x D3 house with lenses. 

After the Olympics, there was a massive switch to Nikon, which still persist in Europe,today many of the major newspapers, photo agencies use D3s D4.

So do not talk too loudly about an AF point who is not working as it should in a semi pro camera and from the first series
As I understand it, the problem is solved

Ei vittu järjestely voi hyvinkin yksinkertaistettu viestiä


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 16, 2012)

The 61-Point AF system from canon is the very best AF ever devised in modern 35mm AF Cameras as of the latest firmware update .


----------



## rpt (Nov 16, 2012)

jukka said:


> Ei vittu järjestely voi hyvinkin yksinkertaistettu viestiä


*jukka*, sorry I don't understand Finnish. Could you please explain this sentence to me? I don't trust computer translations. They could translate _*server*_ to *servant*! And in my line of work that is a big deal


----------



## PackLight (Nov 16, 2012)

It should be obvious to everyone that Canon is at the point they may declare bankruptcy.
I just read this article, and apparantly Canon is doing much worse than thought.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/canon-u-closes-2012-award-140000960.html


----------



## tron (Nov 16, 2012)

PackLight said:


> It should be obvious to everyone that Canon is at the point they may declare bankruptcy.
> I just read this article, and apparantly Canon is doing much worse than thought.
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/canon-u-closes-2012-award-140000960.html


 ;D ;D ;D


----------



## unfocused (Nov 16, 2012)

PackLight said:


> It should be obvious to everyone that Canon is at the point they may declare bankruptcy.
> I just read this article, and apparantly Canon is doing much worse than thought.
> 
> http://finance.yahoo.com/news/canon-u-closes-2012-award-140000960.html



Yes, and contrast that with Sony's incredible performance. http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/14/3647536/sony-convertible-bond-image-sensor-investment

I guess those superior-in-every-way sensors from Sony that I keep reading about on this forum are really helping the company.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 16, 2012)

unfocused said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > It should be obvious to everyone that Canon is at the point they may declare bankruptcy.
> ...



Sony is a great company, but they should stick to TV's and making movies like Skyfall.


----------



## sandymandy (Nov 16, 2012)

PackLight said:


> Sony is a great company, but they should stick to TV's and making movies like Skyfall.



Sony produces the sensor for Nikon D600. 
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/11/08/teardowns-of-nikon-d600-reveal-sony-sensor-hard-to-replace-lcd-screen/
Perhaps even in other models? 

Yep, just read it d800 too. http://nikonrumors.com/2012/08/29/confirmed-the-sensor-inside-the-nikon-d800-is-made-by-sony.aspx/


----------



## jrista (Nov 16, 2012)

sandymandy said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > Sony is a great company, but they should stick to TV's and making movies like Skyfall.
> ...



Um, yes...really, Really, REALLY OOOOLD news?

D7000, D800, D600, D3200 all use Sony Exmor sensors. Pentax K5 uses one as well. A number of other competing camera manufacturers, as well as dozens of compact camera and cell phone brands all use Sony sensors. You might as well expect a "Sony Inside" logo in half the products on the market that have an imaging sensor.


----------



## Simba (Nov 16, 2012)

jrista said:


> sandymandy said:
> 
> 
> > PackLight said:
> ...



For the Nikon dSLR cameras released this year, D3200 and D4 have Nikon sensors, and D5200, D600, and D800 have Sony sensors. They are all damn good. Great to have competition.
http://www.sensorgen.info/


----------



## jukka (Nov 17, 2012)

privatebydesign said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > johnf3f said:
> ...




green hue ?
what profiles are you using


----------



## HarryWintergreen (Nov 17, 2012)

Canon is without doubt a big player in the DSLR business. Canon cameras are faster, Nikon Cameras have a better dynamic range. To me that's a matter of personal taste, nothing else. But when it comes to the non DSLR business I don't see any innovative power. Canon's just reacting on a prettying modest level. This is a bit disappointing.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (Nov 17, 2012)

jukka said:


> johnf3f said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Flather said:
> ...



I believe he describes it as stalling/coughing. Andy switched to Nikon a few years ago due to the introduction of the D3 and he had always wanjted the Nikon 200-400. On his last few international trips he has borrowed 1Dx's and an IR adapted 5D (Mk2 I think) + lenses, don't think he would do that unless he had to.
I am going to one of his lectures on the 30th, it will be interesting to see what he has to say.
Have a look at his Twitter/Facebook pages.


----------



## jukka (Nov 17, 2012)

no, it is easier than that, if some one thinks the LCD shows to green/yellow tint in the Nikon and they are using raw they can adjust the AWB so the display shows a more red warm tone and from the jpg rendition in the LCD (has noting to do with the cameras result and raw files)


----------



## rpt (Nov 18, 2012)

jukka said:


> no, it is easier than that, if some one thinks the LCD shows to green/yellow tint in the Nikon and they are using raw they can adjust the AWB so the display shows a more red warm tone and from the jpg rendition in the LCD (has noting to do with the cameras result and raw files)


But wouldn't you have to edit every picture in post since you artificially changed the AWB?


----------



## friedmud (Nov 18, 2012)

rpt said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > no, it is easier than that, if some one thinks the LCD shows to green/yellow tint in the Nikon and they are using raw they can adjust the AWB so the display shows a more red warm tone and from the jpg rendition in the LCD (has noting to do with the cameras result and raw files)
> ...



What? Why?

I haven't noticed the "green screen" on my D600... but even if the screen were off a bit it wouldn't matter. I don't know anyone that modifies the WB based on how things look on the back screen. You either pick a WB preset based on the lighting (like the tungsten setting), use a grey card for a custom setting or leave it on Auto.

So it wouldn't matter if the screen were off a little bit... it only effects your view while shooting... and not the actual values in the file.

I'll compare the back screen view vs my computer screen and see if I can see any green tint...


----------



## friedmud (Nov 18, 2012)

rpt said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > no, it is easier than that, if some one thinks the LCD shows to green/yellow tint in the Nikon and they are using raw they can adjust the AWB so the display shows a more red warm tone and from the jpg rendition in the LCD (has noting to do with the cameras result and raw files)
> ...



Wait now I see what Jukka was saying... and you are right. It would be foolish to modify the WB setting to compensate for the screen. What a real pain to deal with in post!


----------



## friedmud (Nov 18, 2012)

I compared the same photo on the screen on the back of my D600 to my laptop (recent 15" MacBook Pro) screen and they are very similar. My laptop tends to be a bit warm... and it is slightly warmer than the back screen on the D600, but I couldn't see any "green cast" on the screen in the slightest.


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

it is d800 who has a little more yellow tint in the LCD
If I compare my canon and nikon d800 there should be a middle way, the Canon LCD is little bit red/magenta and d800 little green /yellow


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

friedmud said:


> rpt said:
> 
> 
> > jukka said:
> ...



Get used to se the difference, I have and it is nothing I think about after a while


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

privatebydesign said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > green hue ?
> ...



NO , but the LCD jpg rendition mirrors the chosen profile and settings in the camera


----------



## nightbreath (Nov 18, 2012)

jukka said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > jukka said:
> ...


If you look at D3s vs. D800 screen, there's visible degradation in color rendition in the latter. And it happens when you look at the same file.

Am I wrong?


----------



## amazin (Nov 18, 2012)

Well, look at the glass lineup Canon has and look at others... Canon Rules on this side!

So i am wondering... is there a Nikon troll who sneak in this forum to start that subject? Or are we all so fans of Canon that we are somehow blind at this supposed declined?


----------



## nightbreath (Nov 18, 2012)

amazin said:


> Well, look at the glass lineup Canon has and look at others... Canon Rules on this side!
> 
> So i am wondering... is there a Nikon troll who sneak in this forum to start that subject? Or are we all so fans of Canon that we are somehow blind at this supposed declined?


I believe there are small things that we like much enough to close our eyes on things that care others


----------



## picturesbyme (Nov 18, 2012)

Cheeseburger!


----------



## Jesse (Nov 18, 2012)

@el bouv, your pictures are horrible. Can clearly tell you're using bad technology.


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

nightbreath said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



no you are not wrong, but if you take a raw file from let us say d700 , or d3s and show them in d800, they are looking the same as in d700 or d3s. There are something with the jpg rendition in d800 and some motives=yellow green tint in the d800 LCD.


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

privatebydesign said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > no, it is easier than that, if some one thinks the LCD shows to green/yellow tint in the Nikon and they are using raw they can adjust the AWB so the display shows a more red warm tone and from the jpg rendition in the LCD (has noting to do with the cameras result and raw files)
> ...




no I say nothing about a 6000 dollars camera. I am talking about the jpg pre view colors in the LCD and d800. Nothing else.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 18, 2012)

jukka said:


> no I say nothing about a 6000 dollars camera. I am talking about the jpg pre view colors in the LCD and d800. Nothing else.



But...do you acknowledge that it's a problem? Reportedly the D4 has the same issue. Do you still think changing the AWB parameters is a viable solution?


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

amazin said:


> Well, look at the glass lineup Canon has and look at others... Canon Rules on this side!
> 
> So i am wondering... is there a Nikon troll who sneak in this forum to start that subject? Or are we all so fans of Canon that we are somehow blind at this supposed declined?



well ask el bouv, are you a troll? 

about blindness, it is a question you and others can ask your self and only you have the answer


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > no I say nothing about a 6000 dollars camera. I am talking about the jpg pre view colors in the LCD and d800. Nothing else.
> ...



no I do not, and as I say, you get used, now my Canons LCD looks to reddish, my answer was, if you not like the the yellow tint you can adjust WB so the LCD mirrors a warmer reproduction (RAW), or use another profile (if it is important to se the colors in the LCD" more neutral" ) and regarding d800 the yellow tint are not seen in every situation


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 18, 2012)

jukka said:


> no I do not, and as I say, you get used, now my Canons LCD looks to reddish, my answer was, if you not like the the yellow tint you can adjust WB so the LCD mirrors a warmer reproduction, or use another profile (if it is important to se the colors in the LCD more neutral ) and regarding d800 the yellow tint are not seen in every situation



Ah, I see. It's not a problem, just get used to it and it looks normal. Now, Canon has the problem. Okay, fine.


----------



## NormanBates (Nov 18, 2012)

That's pretty dumb. Nikon has a problem with the LCD, and also with the white balance. You photogs can correct WB when you're back at home, but for video I have to get it right on the spot, otherwise IQ suffers, and having both a "custom WB" issue (use a shot of a white card to define white, results may or may not be fine) and an LCD tint issue (so I can't dial in the proper K value by eye) just plain stinks.

I still the D800 is the better camera, and wouldn't buy a 5D3 if I can get a D800 for less $$$, but this is a real issue, and denying just takes weight out of the proper arguments (resolution, DR).

What I don't get is why you photogs care so much about this: you can shoot RAW and correct WB in post, no harm to IQ whatsoever!


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > no I do not, and as I say, you get used, now my Canons LCD looks to reddish, my answer was, if you not like the the yellow tint you can adjust WB so the LCD mirrors a warmer reproduction, or use another profile (if it is important to se the colors in the LCD more neutral ) and regarding d800 the yellow tint are not seen in every situation
> ...



who says Canon has a problem? If you are shooting with them both you can se different rendition in the LCD, this has nothing to do with the results


----------



## jukka (Nov 18, 2012)

NormanBates said:


> That's pretty dumb. Nikon has a problem with the LCD, and also with the white balance. You photogs can correct WB when you're back at home, but for video I have to get it right on the spot, otherwise IQ suffers, and having both a "custom WB" issue (use a shot of a white card to define white, results may or may not be fine) and an LCD tint issue (so I can't dial in the proper K value by eye) just plain stinks.
> 
> I still the D800 is the better camera, and wouldn't buy a 5D3 if I can get a D800 for less $$$, but this is a real issue, and denying just takes weight out of the proper arguments (resolution, DR).
> 
> What I don't get is why you photogs care so much about this: you can shoot RAW and correct WB in post, no harm to IQ whatsoever!



I have done a lot of works with both Canon and Nikon800 the last half year, I have no problem with the d800 default WB, can you specify what you mean


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 18, 2012)

jukka said:


> who says Canon has a problem?



You did. 



jukka said:


> ...now my Canons LCD looks to reddish



Oh, and by the way, your comment that you get used to it (the greenish tint on the D800) is interesting - if the LCD was displaying correct colors, there'd be nothing to 'get used' to...



@NormanBates - thank you, but you fail to understand. Let me try to explain. *The D800 has no problems. The problem is anyone who fails too appreciate its perfection.*




<\sardonic impersonation>


----------



## jrista (Nov 19, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> Maui5150 said:
> 
> 
> > el bouv said:
> ...



Technically speaking, the D4 literally could NOT take a photo like that with that low level of noise. The NY blackout was shot at a NATIVE ISO 25600, where as the D4 tops out at a native ISO 12800. If you enabled expanded mode ISO settings, on the D4 ISO 25600 is just a 1 stop digital boost to ISO 12800. That is the same as using ISO 12800 and underexposing by 1 stop, then boosting in post. The D4 has no DR advantage at that level, as the very very vast majority of noise at ISO 12800 is photon noise, and dynamic range is limited by physics. A digital boost is going to lift all of that noise as well, so I'd be doubtful it could take a shot at ISO 25600 expanded as cleanly as the 1D X at a native ISO of 25600. The 1D X, on the other hand, will use per-pixel amplification during read (and thus before read noise is introduced) to achieve its ISO 25600. The photo will still be dominated by photon shot noise, but with the high S/N of the 1D X, it should always produce a cleaner photo at ISO settings above 12800 than the D4. Additionally, the 1D X, since it has native ISO settings up to 51200, can use third-stop ISO settings between ISO 25600 and 51200, where as the D4 is limited to full-stop digital boost settings between ISO 25600 and 51200 (as well as 102400 and 204800, same as the 1D X).

I'd call the 1D X the definite winner in the high ISO game here...cleaner readout (no digital boost) with finer-grained third-stop ISO settings up through ISO 51200.


----------



## Duprant (Nov 19, 2012)

jrista said:


> Technically speaking, the D4 literally could NOT take a photo like that with that low level of noise. The NY blackout was shot at a NATIVE ISO 25600, where as the D4 tops out at a native ISO 12800. If you enabled expanded mode ISO settings, on the D4 ISO 25600 is just a 1 stop digital boost to ISO 12800. That is the same as using ISO 12800 and underexposing by 1 stop, then boosting in post. The D4 has no DR advantage at that level, as the very very vast majority of noise at ISO 12800 is photon noise, and dynamic range is limited by physics. A digital boost is going to lift all of that noise as well, so I'd be doubtful it could take a shot at ISO 25600 expanded as cleanly as the 1D X at a native ISO of 25600. The 1D X, on the other hand, will use per-pixel amplification during read (and thus before read noise is introduced) to achieve its ISO 25600. The photo will still be dominated by photon shot noise, but with the high S/N of the 1D X, it should always produce a cleaner photo at ISO settings above 12800 than the D4. Additionally, the 1D X, since it has native ISO settings up to 51200, can use third-stop ISO settings between ISO 25600 and 51200, where as the D4 is limited to full-stop digital boost settings between ISO 25600 and 51200 (as well as 102400 and 204800, same as the 1D X).
> 
> I'd call the 1D X the definite winner in the high ISO game here...cleaner readout (no digital boost) with finer-grained third-stop ISO settings up through ISO 51200.



Actually nearly ever modern camera uses digital amplification at ISOs below its max "native" speed, sometimes at ISOs significantly below the max native speed, depending on where the noise gains from analog amplification stop.


----------



## jukka (Nov 19, 2012)

jrista said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > Maui5150 said:
> ...



if I am not colorblind the measurements tells a different story


----------



## CatfishSoupFTW (Nov 19, 2012)

pdirestajr said:


> What "innovations" has Nikon brought to the table recently? Technology is pretty good these days. If people switch systems every time the competition has a marginally better spec'd product on paper... you'll be spending a LOT of time and money switching back and forth rather than taking photos.




well said. 

as much as I love canon, Nikon has their great products as well. I honestly have no hate, and both excel in their tasks. Some nikons may be better and some canon may be better, but if you seem that invested and with such great gear, not unless you are pouring cash out of your nose, then i dunno. Seems like such a waste of money. maybe if this was the case if you had a rebel or a D40, then switching to either company may be easier... or maybe have both? I dunno. 

what I do agree with though are the prices canon sometimes have for their products, despite that they may be great products, sometimes overpriced and canon (this goes for you as well nikon) go hand in hand. 

great opinion, but I feel that there seems to be too much negativity in your thinking. and with all the gear you have, producing great work isnt all in the camera itself.


----------



## jrista (Nov 19, 2012)

Duprant said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Technically speaking, the D4 literally could NOT take a photo like that with that low level of noise. The NY blackout was shot at a NATIVE ISO 25600, where as the D4 tops out at a native ISO 12800. If you enabled expanded mode ISO settings, on the D4 ISO 25600 is just a 1 stop digital boost to ISO 12800. That is the same as using ISO 12800 and underexposing by 1 stop, then boosting in post. The D4 has no DR advantage at that level, as the very very vast majority of noise at ISO 12800 is photon noise, and dynamic range is limited by physics. A digital boost is going to lift all of that noise as well, so I'd be doubtful it could take a shot at ISO 25600 expanded as cleanly as the 1D X at a native ISO of 25600. The 1D X, on the other hand, will use per-pixel amplification during read (and thus before read noise is introduced) to achieve its ISO 25600. The photo will still be dominated by photon shot noise, but with the high S/N of the 1D X, it should always produce a cleaner photo at ISO settings above 12800 than the D4. Additionally, the 1D X, since it has native ISO settings up to 51200, can use third-stop ISO settings between ISO 25600 and 51200, where as the D4 is limited to full-stop digital boost settings between ISO 25600 and 51200 (as well as 102400 and 204800, same as the 1D X).
> ...



Canon used to use a secondary ANALOG amplifier for ISO's above 1600 or 3200 in the past, after read but before the ADC. It was not as good as per-pixel read amplification, but it was still better than digital boost. The only time digital boost was applied was for ISO's above max native. Given the quality of Canon's ISO settings on the 1D X up through ISO 25600, and given that there is no other evidence to the contrary, I no longer believe that is the case. ISO 51200 appears to take a similar hit to IQ that previous Canon cameras took above ISO 1600, so it may still use that separate additional amplifier...but it is still all *analog* until you start using expanded settings (102400 and 204800).


----------



## jukka (Nov 19, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > who says Canon has a problem?
> ...



the eyes (brain) adapt to the more yellow LCD after a while.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2012)

jukka said:


> the eyes (brain) adapt to the more yellow LCD after a while.



Thank you, yes, I do know a little something about neural plasticity. : Just because the brain can adapt to seeing the world upside down when wearing inverting prism lenses doesn't mean the world is actually upside down, nor is the world yellow-green tinted. I prefer my world right-side up and correctly tinted, thank you very much.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 19, 2012)

The d800 screen looks like vomit. Very similar to what It used to look like on my 5Dc. Its terrible.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 19, 2012)

Well it is final. Canon must be closing the doors. This morning they announced they were sending all of their share holders money. No doubt because things are so bad.

I guess that is why they refered to it as a dividend. They are dividing up the companies assets before bankruptcy.


----------



## jukka (Nov 19, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The d800 screen looks like vomit. Very similar to what It used to look like on my 5Dc. Its terrible.



strong words, there are no problem to adjust the AWB a little bit and and then the motive looks fine at the LCD in d800.
The yellow /green tint is gone (in the LCD)
The small AWB correction does not affect the jpg image out from the camera 

This is AWB from 5dmk2, d800 and raw file adjusted
None of the AWB in 5dmk2 or d800 does a proper job in 2800K


----------



## jukka (Nov 19, 2012)

privatebydesign said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > no I do not, and as I say, you get used, now my Canons LCD looks to reddish, my answer was, if you not like the the yellow tint you can adjust WB so the LCD mirrors a warmer reproduction (RAW), *or use another profile* (if it is important to se the colors in the LCD" more neutral" ) and regarding d800 the yellow tint are not seen in every situation
> ...



pictures style standard , neutral etc are profiles and the differences shall also been shown in the LCD


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2012)

jukka said:


> there are no problem to adjust the AWB a little bit and and then the motive looks fine at the LCD in d800.
> The AWB correction does not affect the jpg image out from the camera



If you're saying one must adjust the AWB so the D800 LCD shows the correct color, there *IS* a problem. I don't see how that can be interpreted any other way. 

So, if you alter the baseline AWB on the D800, it has no effect on the JPG image output? I don't understand - if that's true, what is the point of the adjustment??


----------



## jukka (Nov 19, 2012)

There are probably a bug in the jpg rendition, as I told you before, a d700 or d3s picture looks the same in d700 and d800 LCD . And no, in a serie I just shoot from d800 and JPG (I never use JPG) I can not se any visual differences in the out come


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2012)

jukka said:


> There are probably a bug in the jpg rendition, as I told you before, a d700 or d3s picture looks the same in d700 and d800 LCD .



So...the LCD has a problem in that there is an incorrect color tint, and the in camera JPG conversion engine has a bug so that it fails to incorporate modifications to the baseline AWB during conversion. What do you know, two wrongs *DO* make a right!

Has the AWB bug been substantiated? This is the first I've heard of it...


----------



## jrista (Nov 19, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > There are probably a bug in the jpg rendition, as I told you before, a d700 or d3s picture looks the same in d700 and d800 LCD .
> ...



Early on there was a bug with AWB, as D800 users were seeing the same green tint they had on the LCD in post. One of the video reviews, I think it was the one with the rodeo guy, actually demonstrated the problem. As far as I know, that was cleared up within the first few months via a firmware update.


----------



## jukka (Nov 19, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jukka said:
> 
> 
> > There are probably a bug in the jpg rendition, as I told you before, a d700 or d3s picture looks the same in d700 and d800 LCD .
> ...



we are going to look in to it tomorrow

here is the result from my 5dmk2 and d800
Jpg shooten with AWB in 2800K LIGHT

5DMK2 TO THE LEFT AND D800 TO THE RIGHT JPG and AWB

AND a corrected RAW FROM 5DMK2


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2012)

Awww so two wrongs do not make a right, because one of the wrongs has already been fixed, leaving only one wrong - the tinted LCD. 

What is the point of these JPG images, with such an arbitrary subject, when obviously they are going to be impacted by other in-camera settings besides AWB (Picture Style, etc.)?


----------



## jrista (Nov 19, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> What is the point of these JPG images, with such an arbitrary subject, when obviously they are going to be impacted by other in-camera settings besides AWB (Picture Style, etc.)?



Sounds like classic Mikael to me...so everything is status quo. ;P


----------



## jukka (Nov 19, 2012)

Well , one is to show that 5dmk2 AWB is not better in than d800 in 2800K LIGHT and that we can agree that the LCD from d800 and 5dmk2 are showing the pre view jpg different


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2012)

jukka said:


> Well , one is to show that 5dmk2 AWB is not better in than d800 in 2800K LIGHT



And what, exactly, does that have to do with the problem of the D800's incorrectly tinted LCD? From what I can tell, nothing. As I understand it, herring is popular in Scandinavian countries. Seems like the red variety is being offered here...


----------



## jukka (Nov 19, 2012)

Oh, I thought you understood that if I or any other change a little in the AWB, see above, the image from the LCD are not showing any green /yellow tint


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 19, 2012)

jukka said:


> Oh, I thought you understood that if I or any other change a little in the AWB, see above, the image from the LCD are not showing any green /yellow tint



I do understand. I thought that you understood that changing the AWB to correct the on-camera LCD display problem also changes WB of the JPG file output, and the RAW metadata AWB value as well, forcing one to live with a systematically incorrect WB or correct all files in post. As a 'fix' for the LCD tint problem, your suggestion leaves much to be desired.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 20, 2012)

jukka said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > The d800 screen looks like vomit. Very similar to what It used to look like on my 5Dc. Its terrible.
> ...



These level cameras are very expensive. I expect them to get out of my way and get me my photos I want. 

For 3000$ in 2012, I expect a proper LCD.


----------



## Bennymiata (Nov 20, 2012)

Some months ago, I noticed that Myer were having a 20% off sale in their camera department, so I went in and asked if they had a 5D MkIII in stock.
The guy checked up and said that they didn't have any of them in stock, but could order one in for me.
I asked if he ordered it, would I still get 20% off the RRP, and he said yes I would.
So, I ordered my 5D3 from him and 4 days later it arrived in and I ended up saving around $400 from the cheapest Aussie stock I could find at the time, and I even got a $75.00 gift card with it as an extra bonus.

Sometimes, you have to keep your nose to the ground to get the best deals, and sometimes, they come from the most unexpected places.


----------

