# Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 7, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/canon-announcement-april-23-2013-cr2/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/canon-announcement-april-23-2013-cr2/">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>New Stuff!</strong>
We’re told Canon is holding press events on Tuesday, April 23, 2013. We have not seen any official invites, but this does come from a known source. I will post any invites I receive here to confirm.</p>
<p>No mention of what products to expect, though I would think an announcement for the EOS 70D must be close.</p>
<p>Pay close attention to the new sensor in the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/945057-REG/canon_8575b001_eos_digital_rebel_sl1.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Canon EOS SL1</a> as far as performance goes. We’re told this sensor will appear in the EOS 70D, but not the EOS 7D Mark II.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## jarrieta (Apr 7, 2013)

Oh well basically the same sensor again.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 7, 2013)

BOOOORING ... don't care at all for a 70D

Would be much more interested in a hi-end Canon mirrorless .. EOS-M "done right" ...


----------



## edwardkth (Apr 7, 2013)

stop announcing any stupid news from canon....really rumors at all..


----------



## bseitz234 (Apr 7, 2013)

jarrieta said:


> Oh well basically the same sensor again.


Yeah but we knew that... They don't want to undermine the 7d2.

I fully expect the 70D will be a refreshed 7D: "new" sensor with on-chip AF, built on the same process. Better sealing than 60D, somewhere in the 6-8fps range, and decent (maybe 7D) AF. Given that 7Ds now go for 1300ish new, I'd think that 7d specs would put the 70d right where they want it in the lineup. That sets them up well for a 7d2 to be a better camera, that they can charge accordingly for.


----------



## RafalN (Apr 7, 2013)

The only "product" will be long expected and announced long time ago .... new firmware for 5DIII  Seriously !!! ;D


----------



## Ricku (Apr 7, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> BOOOORING ... don't care at all for a 70D. Would be much more interested in a hi-end Canon mirrorless .. EOS-M "done right" ...


I have to agree with this. A 70D is just another cropster.

I hope the announcement is about the long awaited high MP / high DR body, or a bunch of new lenses. Like the 35L II, 50L II, 50 1.4 II, 135L II, 14-24L, e.t.c.


----------



## jarrieta (Apr 7, 2013)

bseitz234 said:


> jarrieta said:
> 
> 
> > Oh well basically the same sensor again.
> ...



Well we don't know that yet for sure but if this is true this will be the 10th (I believe) Canon camera with basically the same 18mp sensor. Of course what some of us wish for the 70d may not be what we get. Anyway, nothing new a lot of us Canon users are probably used to it by now.


----------



## fabiopb (Apr 7, 2013)

RafalN said:


> The only "product" will be long expected and announced long time ago .... new firmware for 5DIII  Seriously !!! ;D



I agree. It will be the new firmware for 5D mark 3. (AF at f8).


----------



## Canon-F1 (Apr 7, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Pay close attention to the new sensor in the Canon EOS SL1 as far as performance goes. We’re told this sensor will appear in the EOS 70D, but not the EOS 7D Mark II.
> ...



LOL.. if canon has proved one thing over and over again it is that they can sell even old bread well.

what people on this forum think has absolutely no influence on the mass market.
actually it´s sad because i too would like to see canon make more progess on image quality.

not that canon cameras make bad quality images.. just that IQ has not much improved over the last years.


----------



## RGF (Apr 7, 2013)

edwardkth said:


> stop announcing any stupid news from canon....really rumors at all..



But the forum is CanonRUMORS. - What do you expects?


----------



## Zv (Apr 7, 2013)

Last time I got excited about a big announcement I was dissapointed. 

This better not be some baloney about some lame extra picture styles or a new shop opening in China.


----------



## Rodknee (Apr 7, 2013)

Even I could beat Usain Bolt if he stands still on the track and just lately Canon seem to be standing still which leaves the chance for others to beat them.


----------



## RGF (Apr 7, 2013)

jarrieta said:


> Oh well basically the same sensor again.



Canon has an investment in the 18 MP APS-C sensor. It appears to be a sweet spot for them. They are then segmenting the market (marketing 101) by changing functions with in the body (AF, buffer size, focus points, ...). 

Sensor advances will come in the high end cameras - not the low end cameras. Creating a new sensor is expensive so to get maximum economic return Canon will first release it in high end bodies with higher margins. This given consumer the incentive to purchase a more expensive camera


----------



## Canon-F1 (Apr 7, 2013)

Rodknee said:


> Even I could beat Usain Bolt if he stands still on the track and just lately Canon seem to be standing still which leaves the chance for others to beat them.



problem is, even when canon moves slow .. no other company is beating it on sales or profit.


----------



## RGF (Apr 7, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Canon-F1 said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



They make nearly a $1 billion in operating profit. Hardly call that a joke. Keep in mind that most purchasers of the low end cameras want very basic functions (I doubt many even shoot in raw) so current technology is good enough for them


----------



## RGF (Apr 7, 2013)

Canon-F1 said:


> Rodknee said:
> 
> 
> > Even I could beat Usain Bolt if he stands still on the track and just lately Canon seem to be standing still which leaves the chance for others to beat them.
> ...



+100. Well said


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 7, 2013)

RGF said:


> Canon has an investment in the 18 MP APS-C sensor. It appears to be a sweet spot for them. They are then segmenting the market (marketing 101) by changing functions with in the body (AF, buffer size, focus points, ...).
> 
> Sensor advances will come in the high end cameras - not the low end cameras. Creating a new sensor is expensive so to get maximum economic return Canon will first release it in high end bodies with higher margins.  This given consumer the incentive to purchase a more expensive camera



Where do you get this data?


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 7, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> Would be much more interested in a hi-end Canon mirrorless .. EOS-M "done right" ...



+1...with faster AF speed. Not like current EOS-M ;D


----------



## Dylan777 (Apr 7, 2013)

Ricku said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > BOOORING ... don't care at all for a 70D. Would be much more interested in a hi-end Canon mirrorless .. EOS-M "done right" ...
> ...



+1....I'll take one of each


----------



## Rodknee (Apr 7, 2013)

I don't think many people choose a camera based on the company's sales or profit - have yet to see that included on the camera's spec sheet....................


----------



## jarrieta (Apr 7, 2013)

RGF said:


> jarrieta said:
> 
> 
> > Oh well basically the same sensor again.
> ...



Oh I understand well how Canon is really a conservative company and they are more responsible to their stakeholders. The company understands the market better than the competition. How else can they be a market leader? Not to say Canon makes poor products but a release like the 700d really has no reason to exist IMHO but to squeeze that sensor for everything it's worth while offering subtle changes. The low-end DSLR's are their bread and butter. Some people that are starting into photography probably rely on reviews and eventually the lack on innovation specially on the Rebel line or xxD series will take it toll on Canon's position when they see at the same price point there is a better alternative. I like their move with the 100D though. 

I'm a Rebel user but I'm one of those on the fence to move up to the 70D or 6D, maybe even the 7D2. I'm hoping the 70D will have a noticeable IQ improvement. Otherwise may just go with the 6D.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Apr 7, 2013)

Rodknee said:


> I don't think many people choose a camera based on the company's sales or profit - have yet to see that included on the camera's spec sheet....................



well you don´t get the point...


----------



## Canon-F1 (Apr 7, 2013)

jarrieta said:


> Some people that are starting into photography probably rely on reviews and eventually the lack on innovation specially on the Rebel line or xxD series will take it toll on Canon's position when they see at the same price point there is a better alternative.



i have to play the advocatus diaboli...

can you post such reviews?

most reviews these people will read (from commercial magazines and websites) are pretty good for canon cameras.

you have to come to a website like this or see youtube rants from unkown selfclaimed "experts" to hear really negative stuff about canon. 

as much as i like canon to notice those complains... i doubt it will have an effect.


----------



## Barrfly (Apr 7, 2013)

This looks new http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_333738_-1


----------



## drjlo (Apr 7, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’re told Canon is holding press events on Tuesday, April 23, 2013.



I really wish I could trick myself into getting excited :-[


----------



## jarrieta (Apr 7, 2013)

Canon-F1 said:


> jarrieta said:
> 
> 
> > Some people that are starting into photography probably rely on reviews and eventually the lack on innovation specially on the Rebel line or xxD series will take it toll on Canon's position when they see at the same price point there is a better alternative.
> ...



Ummmm there are a bunch of reviews and comparisons on the net which for most is the easiest source of information. Let's face it a lot of people would just go to Google and type whatever criteria they want like "which is the best camera for under $1000 and so on." Sure Canon will still make a killing and that's the sad part as long as they profit I see no reason why they will take risks in certain market segments. As much as I think other companies may have better features and innovation at a particular class or price point, I haven't had any problems with the Canon products I've had. That's why despite some gripes I won't be going anywhere else.


----------



## weixing (Apr 7, 2013)

RGF said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Canon-F1 said:
> ...


Hi,
Totally agree... many people are happy with the image taken from their mobile, so image from any Canon entry level DSLR will be wow to them. IMHO, the selling point of Canon DSLR is easy to use and that will make a big different when choosing their first DSLR.

Have a nice day.


----------



## timmy_650 (Apr 7, 2013)

Canon-F1 said:


> jarrieta said:
> 
> 
> > Some people that are starting into photography probably rely on reviews and eventually the lack on innovation specially on the Rebel line or xxD series will take it toll on Canon's position when they see at the same price point there is a better alternative.
> ...



I have given those reviews to friends. That happens often to me, I know about cameras so my friends ask me what camera they should get. A few months ago a friend told me she was going to get a 7D and i asked her why and it was bc she wanted a good camera. She does most indoor studio work.... so long story short... she shoots a Nikon 600.


----------



## Tom W (Apr 7, 2013)

Canon Rumors said:


> Pay close attention to the new sensor in the Canon EOS SL1 as far as performance goes.



I am for certain paying attention to that. Wondering if Canon has really made a significant change to their APS-C sensor or not. That little SL1 might be a pretty versatile little body for use on a telescope, since it's so small and light. Not quite like a dedicated astrophotography tool, but something that the "weekend duffer" with a decent telescope could use.


----------



## 2n10 (Apr 7, 2013)

Barrfly said:


> This looks new http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_333738_-1



It has been announced already.


----------



## jebrady03 (Apr 7, 2013)

If this rumor is true, Canon just killed any possibility I'll be replacing my 60D with the 70D. I was hoping for better IQ and dynamic range (happy with what I have for what I paid - but I'd like something better and have the money to spend). Now the question becomes, do I go with a 6D and sell the 60D or just stick with what I've got?


----------



## pdirestajr (Apr 7, 2013)

If I were to guess, Canon doesn't make or market every one of their cameras to every consumer. They probably don't expect a 60D user to replace their camera with a 70D. If anything, a 60D user should be happy the advancements are only "minor" from one body to the next. I'm happy to not be tempted to spend more money. Why would you wan to upgrade every release? They "need" to make the annual upgrades to keep with their tech advancements.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 7, 2013)

edwardkth said:


> stop announcing any stupid news from canon....really rumors at all..


 
I wonder why you came to a Canon Rumors site just post this? If you don't want to read about Rumors, you came to the wrong place.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 7, 2013)

RGF said:


> jarrieta said:
> 
> 
> > Oh well basically the same sensor again.
> ...



wrong on almost everything (other than they have an old investment in their current process, which includes the current 18MP sensor and do want to milk the heck out of it)

highest end bodies sell so few copies the high margin doesn't make up for anything compared to low-end body sales

new sensors have absolutely not always come out in the high end models


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 7, 2013)

jarrieta said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > jarrieta said:
> ...



they are a market leader because they once deserved it, they could and should be running away with it not merely just a bit ahead

eventually you'll no longer be if you sit around forever though

their good lenses also helped and the 5D2 video helped for that generation


----------



## that1guyy (Apr 7, 2013)

Another disappointment from Canon!  

It is sad how I have money, ready to buy a new camera, but nothing to spend it on. If only the D7100 had a tilt screen I'd jump right now.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 7, 2013)

dilbert said:


> What is Canon doing?
> 
> Nothing. What a joke of a company.



What is Canon doing? Delivering value to their shareholders by consistently selling more cameras than their competitors. If that trend continues, the innovations of other manufacturers may become irrelevant.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 7, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > jarrieta said:
> ...



New technology ALWAYS comes on the top high end models first.......

Just like Digic 6 did not first appear on powershots.....  Just like WiFi was first on the 1DX 

Look at the upcoming (rumoured) high megapixel camera..... it looks like it may have equivalent pixel density to a T5i. If you really want a good clue what it will be like, watch the specs for the upcoming (rumoured) 7D2, that should tell you to expect for sensor performance.... and should show you what to expect from other FF upgrades....

Stuff will be introduced when it is ready..... something has to be first.... you can not hold up ALL lines to wait for one.


----------



## bseitz234 (Apr 7, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Just like WiFi was first on the 1DX



Just to nitpick for the sake of nitpicking (I agree with what you are saying in general): Wifi is hardly new technology anymore... :

Also, since this thread has already deteriorated like dozens before it, I guess I'll share this observation here. Canon may be a market leader in terms of sales, profit, whatever, but in at least one market, they're WAY behind. I was in Washington, DC this week for a conference at a hotel right across from the national zoo. I would go for a walk in the zoo on lunch break, because the weather was nice and it was outdoors. I saw dozens of small Nikon SLRs, and in 3 days of walking around, only two other Canon SLRs: one CPS member with a 1Dx+300 2.8 II, and a 7D+70-200 IS II. Not that this was conclusive in any way, it was just an unexpected observation I made...


----------



## Act444 (Apr 7, 2013)

bseitz234 said:


> jarrieta said:
> 
> 
> > Oh well basically the same sensor again.
> ...



Yes, all indications seem to point to the prospective 70D being to the 7D what the 6D was to the old 5D II - a sort of modernized version of the same camera with the same specs and same features, giving and taking a few small items.


----------



## wickidwombat (Apr 8, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > What is Canon doing?
> ...



or just get bought by canon since they will have actual money... as opposed to a monster credit card bill 
but now i'm splitting hairs


----------



## ddashti (Apr 8, 2013)

This will probably turn out to be true.
7D Mark II will definitely have to wait...


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Pay close attention to the new sensor in the Canon EOS SL1 as far as performance goes. We’re told this sensor will appear in the EOS 70D, but not the EOS 7D Mark II.
> ...




lol. Love your analogy.


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Apr 8, 2013)

Canon-F1 said:


> Rodknee said:
> 
> 
> > Even I could beat Usain Bolt if he stands still on the track and just lately Canon seem to be standing still which leaves the chance for others to beat them.
> ...




This is sad but true. I wish they were losing money like water to motivate them to do better. I mean really, the 600EX-RT was a stroke genius, why haven't they continued that kind of innovation through the rest of their line? It makes no sense at all. Canon has so much going for them e.g. the menu system; top class, the camera body ergonomics; can't be beat, excellent optics, so why can't they get their act together and design better sensors and give us more features for our hard earned bucks to keep them, as well as the photographers who use their gear competitive? People tend to forget that aspect of the equation. We as professionals have a lot invested in the gear we choose. If other photogs are shooting with better gear, it gives them a slight edge. In the competitive market for photogs, even a slight edge can mean all the difference in the world. If someone can deliver a more finely detailed image in the same low light conditions, they have an edge. Would you rather slice with a butcher's knife or a finely crafted katana? Sure both will get the job done, but I'd rather use the tool that lets me get it done more efficiently and perhaps with finer detail.


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Apr 8, 2013)

Rodknee said:


> I don't think many people choose a camera based on the company's sales or profit - have yet to see that included on the camera's spec sheet....................




+1000
Well said.


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Apr 8, 2013)

pdirestajr said:


> If I were to guess, Canon doesn't make or market every one of their cameras to every consumer. They probably don't expect a 60D user to replace their camera with a 70D. If anything, a 60D user should be happy the advancements are only "minor" from one body to the next. I'm happy to not be tempted to spend more money. Why would you wan to upgrade every release? They "need" to make the annual upgrades to keep with their tech advancements.




But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 8, 2013)

ddashti said:


> This will probably turn out to be true.
> 7D Mark II will definitely have to wait...



Probably so. If they had the new sensor line ready we'd probably see the 7D2 and high MP cam now (honestly, I hope it even ready by the time for those late this year). Then can come out with an 80D early next year with the new line sensor and get some to double dip.


----------



## mkunert (Apr 8, 2013)

edwardkth said:


> stop announcing any stupid news from canon....really rumors at all..



Says the fool complaining about rumors being posted on a website called CanonRumors.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 8, 2013)

DarkKnightNine said:


> But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. *The average consumer may not notice or even care*, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!



Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.


----------



## ksagomonyants (Apr 8, 2013)

Guys, I'll probably ask a very naive and somewhat a silly question... What exactly is the difference between different generations of Canon sensors? I mean, let's say Canon 5d ii and iii share the same sensor (correct?) however 5d iii overall has a better signal/noise ratio. That means that the improvements in the image quality do not necessarily require a new sensor technology? So, why do we all want Canon to have a new generation of sensors in their DSLR? Just curios


----------



## jarrieta (Apr 8, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> they are a market leader because they once deserved it, they could and should be running away with it not merely just a bit ahead



Sad but true. Looking at the Amazon top 10 sellers, there are 6 Canons, 4 of which are Rebels. So Canon must be pretty happy despite incremental feature upgrades the Rebels sell great. I still have the T2i and since I just do portraits and some office events I really didn't feel there are enough improvement to "upgrade" to any of the other crop bodies. I really don't mind if they don't get more megapixels but better DR and ISO performance would be most welcome if the 70d gets the same 18mp count. So hoping the 70d would be worth it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > DarkKnightNine said:
> ...



Did you call Canon and tell them your story? I'm sure it would have a profound impact on their corporate strategy. :

FWIW (which, frankly, is just about the same as your story is worth), I _can_ in all honesty recommend Canon dSLRs to people, because 1) there's much more to _camera_ performance than DxO measures, 2) lenses are far more important than bodies and Canon has the upper hand there.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 8, 2013)

I fell for the hype and bought a Nikon D800. It was a nice camera, but, the 24-70mm G. Nikon's top of the line lens was a disaster. Even now, only a very few lenses can get the best of the D800, and, they are third party lenses, or prime lenses.
The big problem came with the lack of performance in extreme low light. It wasn't bad, just a little worse than the 5D MK III. Live View was another shortcoming, a poor implementation.

Since the big bucks is investments in lenses, I decided that paying more for less was not really the way to go.

I likely would never consider getting a nother high mp body unless it actually delivers enough more when coupled with a lens..


----------



## ewg963 (Apr 8, 2013)

Ricku said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > BOOOORING ... don't care at all for a 70D. Would be much more interested in a hi-end Canon mirrorless .. EOS-M "done right" ...
> ...


+1000


----------



## M.ST (Apr 8, 2013)

There will be no big megapixel announcement in april.

First Canon has to replace some lenses like the EF 16-35 II L, the EF 17-40 L ...

Both lenses don´t work pretty with the big megapixel prototypes.


----------



## wickidwombat (Apr 8, 2013)

M.ST said:


> There will be no big megapixel announcement in april.
> 
> First Canon has to replace some lenses like the EF 16-35 II L, the EF 17-40 L ...
> 
> Both lenses don´t work pretty with the big megapixel prototypes.



i'd be interested in the new 16-35 !


----------



## David Hull (Apr 8, 2013)

ksagomonyants said:


> Guys, I'll probably ask a very naive and somewhat a silly question... What exactly is the difference between different generations of Canon sensors? I mean, let's say Canon 5d ii and iii share the same sensor (correct?) however 5d iii overall has a better signal/noise ratio. That means that the improvements in the image quality do not necessarily require a new sensor technology? So, why do we all want Canon to have a new generation of sensors in their DSLR? Just curios



It is nothing but a bunch of gearhead whiners crying because "theirs" ain't the biggest this week. Ask yourself this: have you ever been able to walk through a gallery and point out which camera shot which photo? If the stuff was as bad as some of these idiots claim, nobody would use it.

Something else you might want to ask yourself: If this Sony technology is such a "game changer" why hasn't the game changed? Where are the stunning examples of what can be done? Why do we continue to see shots of the back of lens caps, mediocre landscape shots with shadows lifted 5 stops just to prove a point? Where are the game changing photographs from this so-called game changing technology?

If this represents such a huge advance in the state of the art of making art, where the heck is the art? Galeries won't hang your DxO curves.


----------



## AG (Apr 8, 2013)

Looks like BMCC and Sony are the first out of the gates with announcements.







http://www.eoshd.com/content/10004/sony-show-cinema-eos-style-future-camera-range-based-around-full-frame-dslrs

Canon had better not disappoint.
If not any "new" tech at least a price drop to match the competition?


----------



## archiea (Apr 8, 2013)

I predict the new iPad 5!!!!!

Whoops, wrong company!!!!

Seriously, what's wrong with new 16-35mm? We need a Mark iii already?


----------



## rpt (Apr 8, 2013)

archiea said:


> I predict the new iPad 5!!!!!
> 
> Whoops, wrong company!!!!


LOL! Thanks. I needed a laugh. ;D


----------



## J.R. (Apr 8, 2013)

I hope I'm wrong but I'm preparing to be underwhelmed ... AGAIN!


----------



## Aglet (Apr 8, 2013)

David Hull said:


> ksagomonyants said:
> 
> 
> > Guys, I'll probably ask a very naive and somewhat a silly question... What exactly is the difference between different generations of Canon sensors? I mean, let's say Canon 5d ii and iii share the same sensor (correct?) however 5d iii overall has a better signal/noise ratio. That means that the improvements in the image quality do not necessarily require a new sensor technology? So, why do we all want Canon to have a new generation of sensors in their DSLR? Just curios
> ...


yup, that under-acheiver, don't fix it cuz it's not _all_ broke, set-the-bar-low attitude's gonna get you some spankin' new sensor system R&D fo' _sho_!'
seriously, whatsamaddawitchyoo?
why you no want improvements?


----------



## traveller (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > It is nothing but a bunch of gearhead whiners crying because "theirs" ain't the biggest this week.
> ...



Dilbert, 

You are evidently a deeply unhappy person as you seem to only come on the forum these days to complain about Canon. All the pent up hate that you're holding inside you must be damaging to your inner artistic vision. If I were using equipment that was seriously frustrating my ability to produce the photos that I envisioned, or that my competitors could deliver, I would feel compelled to take action. I think that you want to take action, but are afraid to do so because you fear that it may be the "wrong" choice in the long term. This inaction means that you are constantly clutching at the straws that are new camera rumours. Because of this, rather than treating rumours as a bit of fun, every piece of (mis)information that damages your hopes of a new Canon "DXOMark-uber-camera", becomes a personal assault on your wellbeing. 

You seriously need to draw a line in the sand and make a decision, either be happy with what Canon currently offers and work around that gear's weaknesses, or bite the bullet and change system. Your current course of (in)action is psychologically damaging to you and getting tiresome to everyone else.


----------



## ewg963 (Apr 8, 2013)

AG said:


> Looks like BMCC and Sony are the first out of the gates with announcements.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 I love competition!!!! It's the name of the game. We'll see....


----------



## klickflip (Apr 8, 2013)

M.ST said:


> There will be no big megapixel announcement in april.
> 
> First Canon has to replace some lenses like the EF 16-35 II L, the EF 17-40 L ...
> 
> Both lenses don´t work pretty with the big megapixel prototypes.



Seems like you may have some inside info here.. I don't know how or what exactly you are testing but if its the big MP prototypes I really wish it will concentrate on noise in shadows at low ISO first , then DR not just on MP. 
I get the feeling the 47mp monster that has been mentioned recently might be overkill and 40mp max may be a perfect balance when considering lens's performance too. 
Also other considerations for a potential MFDB competitor should be be flash sync that would help a lot of people struggling with canon 1/200th sec for location flash scenarios ( and please don't pipe up with speed lights HSS everyone, as for proper professional work speed lights don't cut it, especially when it comes to power and ability to use bigger modifiers). So is it possible to feedback to Canon that 1/500s + flash sync for external units should be a priority to help this camera be used in a proper high end way. 
This together with L primes will be a game changing camera at half the cost of a hassy or phase one but with much much more features and usability. 8)


----------



## insanitybeard (Apr 8, 2013)

Dilbert, I'm genuinely interested. For somebody who obviously dislikes Canon and all it stands for, why are you still posting here? So you can educate newcomers to come towards the light (eg, Nikon) before they settle for any of Canon's rubbish?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 8, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> Dilbert, I'm genuinely interested. For somebody who obviously dislikes Canon and all it stands for, why are you still posting here? So you can educate newcomers to come towards the light (eg, Nikon) before they settle for any of Canon's rubbish?



It's been a little sad to watch the evolutionary descent from human to troll.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I likely would never consider getting another high mp body unless it actually delivers enough more when coupled with a lens..
> ...



That's not what I observe. With the 2.8 40 or 2.8 24 or the 2.0 100 I have some lenses which are very good in my own experience, several serious reviews (photozone, the-digital-picture, dxomark) and user reports (fred miranda, others).

Using the 40D and the 600D shows no dramatic difference in terms of useful resolutions. Lens flaws are better visible with higher resolution but the sheer IQ isn't much increased.

We all know (or believe?) that the D800 from Nikon (and other newer products with same sensor base tech) have the DR advantage compared to Canon. This is a real advantage. But if you look at DxOmark you will find that the useful resolution between 5D mkii and D800 is comparable despite the fact that there is a 22 : 36 MPixel difference. The same applies to the comparison between 40D and 600D:

2.8 40 & 2.0 100: 40D: 7 from 10 Mpixel compared to 7D: 9 from 18 MPixel

I think there is no essential difference in IQ (resolution-wise) between 7 or 9 MPixel, a linear scale difference of roughly 15%.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> [...]
> 
> Correction: Canon's IQ hasn't changed or improved over the last years for anything besides those moving from the 1D series to the 1DX. Nikon, Sony, Pentax, are all delivering new sensors with better performance.
> 
> ...



For the last years you are basically right.

In 2005 I testet a Nikon D70 vs. a Canon 350D. Both with a standard lens. 350D produced photos, D70 produced "digitallish image like results". I decided for a 20D which was far superior just to the D200.
These days Canon was way ahead because these digital cameras produced non-digital looking images.

Now the products of both companies show the capability to produce fine images - quality-wise. Nikon has some advantages.

Oh, I forgotten about the topic of this thread ...

Just let us wait what comes and if a product isn't interesting, skip it. My two 40Ds substituted the defect 20D (repaired it now with 1ml Isopropanole to clean the trigger switch), my 600D was added to allow for flexible video (need macro, strong tele for educational short videos (non-art, just functional!)). And I will replace my 40Ds if sensors have 10 to 15MPix real true color capability (meaning 40-60MPixels in bayer patterns).


----------



## docsmith (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > DarkKnightNine said:
> ...



I should probably just ignore this thread, but I hope you showed your friends this from DXOMark:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Which-lenses-should-you-choose-for-your-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs.-Nikon-D800-Competition-is-closer-than-expected

There was a thread dedicated to this here in CR last week. Turns out even DXO, when they connect the lens to the camera and evaluate the "system" are seeing that Canon and Nikon are a lot closer than it would appear. Roger/lensrentals found something similar when selecting his camera.


----------



## David Hull (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > It is nothing but a bunch of gearhead whiners crying because "theirs" ain't the biggest this week.
> ...



Yea... so what... Michael Reichmann likes Sony; he has his reasons and states them on his website. For every “Luminous Landscape” I can point you to some Canon photographer doing excellent work as well. Look up Pete Souza, there is a guy who could probably talk his boss into buying him any equipment he wants yet he chooses to shoot with a 5DIII (previously a 5DII) and... IMO he does absolutely excellent work (If you don't like Obama go back and look at his work with Reagan). There are plenty of others. Everyone has an opinion but the fact remains that great work is being done with all of these systems and the fact that Nikon’s current gear performs a bit better in a few corner cases doesn’t seem to be changing that much.


----------



## David Hull (Apr 8, 2013)

Aglet said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > ksagomonyants said:
> ...



I would love to see Canon improve their performance in this area and I am sure that they will, but I have no interest in improvement for improvement's sake which is how I read many of these comments. 

As I said, I have yet to see anything put up as an example of what you can do with Sony/Nikon that I couldn't replicate with Canon gear. I don't see any game-changing impact on the state of current "ART" as a result of it. I see excellent photographers doing inspiring work with both systems. This technology has been around for a while and I have yet to see anything come out of it that makes me say… “OMG, I need to put all my Canon stuff up on e-bay and convert to Nikon so I can do this work”.

So, yes from a technology perspective, improve it please, but from a photographic perspective, for me at least, it is sort of a “non-starter”.


----------



## Etienne (Apr 8, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> M.ST said:
> 
> 
> > There will be no big megapixel announcement in april.
> ...



I have the 16-35 2.8L II, it's my most heavily used lens.
I'd upgrade if they improve it, but I'd rather have a 18-28 2.8, or 17-24 2.8 that was cracking good everywhere and a little smaller and lighter.


----------



## Aglet (Apr 8, 2013)

David Hull said:


> I would love to see Canon improve their performance in this area and I am sure that they will, but I have no interest in improvement for improvement's sake which is how I read many of these comments.
> 
> As I said, I have yet to see anything put up as an example of what you can do with Sony/Nikon that I couldn't replicate with Canon gear. I don't see any game-changing impact on the state of current "ART" as a result of it. I see excellent photographers doing inspiring work with both systems. This technology has been around for a while and I have yet to see anything come out of it that makes me say… “OMG, I need to put all my Canon stuff up on e-bay and convert to Nikon so I can do this work”.
> 
> So, yes from a technology perspective, improve it please, but from a photographic perspective, for me at least, it is sort of a “non-starter”.



OK, a perfectly rational sentiment. 
I'm similarly hoping Canon will improve in this one area tho. I still use my older Canon bodies for lots of shots, but I pull out the exmors when I know I'll be pushing the dark areas, cuz there are times I do need that unbanded performance. It's not all about DR, it's about the quality of that DR. And the ballyhoo over the 5d2 was, in my case, all for naught, as it was a very poor performer for my uses, left a bad after-taste. Improvements are inching along tho, 5d3's better and 6d looks pretty good so far. Might even buy one.


----------



## dstppy (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > insanitybeard said:
> ...



I blame other drivers for my aggressiveness. Doesn't mean it's actually them.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 8, 2013)

David Hull said:


> ksagomonyants said:
> 
> 
> > Guys, I'll probably ask a very naive and somewhat a silly question... What exactly is the difference between different generations of Canon sensors? I mean, let's say Canon 5d ii and iii share the same sensor (correct?) however 5d iii overall has a better signal/noise ratio. That means that the improvements in the image quality do not necessarily require a new sensor technology? So, why do we all want Canon to have a new generation of sensors in their DSLR? Just curios
> ...



BS


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 8, 2013)

M.ST said:


> There will be no big megapixel announcement in april.
> 
> First Canon has to replace some lenses like the EF 16-35 II L, the EF 17-40 L ...
> 
> Both lenses don´t work pretty with the big megapixel prototypes.



They probably don't, but the real reason of course is that they milked the old sensor line a bit too long . Canon has tons of lenses that could handle it just fine.


----------



## wjm (Apr 8, 2013)

dilbert said:


> To pick one gallery, that exhibiting the work of the principal behind www.luminous-landscape.com, I imagine that the work being displayed has changed over time from being dominated by Canon sourced material to Sony/Nikon material if what he displays on the web is anything to go buy (and the fact that he no longer owns any Canon DSLRs.) Information about his gallery is at:
> http://www.luminous-landscape.com/about/gallery.shtml
> 
> If you read enough of the essays from professional photographers that write for the above mentioned website then you start to realise that Canon no longer features like it used to as a tool used by artists, never mind photojournalists, etc.



But please tell me why, if I look at the workshop section at "Luminous-landscape.com", I only see people with Canon cameras ...


----------



## David Hull (Apr 8, 2013)

Aglet said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > I would love to see Canon improve their performance in this area and I am sure that they will, but I have no interest in improvement for improvement's sake which is how I read many of these comments.
> ...



I think it will get fixed eventually since:

1. I don't think Canon is going to go too long with a potential image quality deficiency even if it is pretty much a corner case.

2. It costs them something in terms of material cost, battery life and physical size to incorporate the separate chip AFE that they use in all their cameras. They will feel the pain on the low end first in terms of the Rebels and things like the SL 1 where cost, size and battery life are paramount.


----------



## gmrza (Apr 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > What is Canon doing?
> ...



The market (and I am not referring to the whingers on this site) seems to be happy with what Canon is doing. I think an important thing, which a lot of us tend to forget, is that most users of DSLRs never test the limits of their cameras sensors. That has allowed Canon to get a lot of use of the current 18MP sensor.

It looks like Canon is following a totally planned script. My money would be on the 7DII being the camera that will show Canon's next generation of APS-C sensors. After it comes out, Canon will probably wait at least 6 months to trickle the sensor down to the 80D.

What is good to try to do is to plan your buying cycles around your vendor's technology lifecycle. Decide how far you want to be behind the leading edge, and try to avoid buying when a refresh is due. That means, unless you absolutely have to buy an APS-C camera (and I am lumping the G1X in here too) avoid it until after the 7DII launches.


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Apr 9, 2013)

With all the excitement at NAB this year, it seems more likely that these announcements will be within their Cinema Line of cameras.


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Apr 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> DarkKnightNine said:
> 
> 
> > But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. *The average consumer may not notice or even care*, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!
> ...




Now imagine what would happen if we "infinitesimal fraction of the market" stopped supporting Canon. Marketshare is directly related to mindshare. It doesn't matter what the actual facts are, only what people perceive are the facts (Marketing 101). Ask Apple about the Final Cut Pro X fiasco. When enough pros (who equally represented a small portion of Apple's market share) bashed the new editing software, everyone else abandoned it as well as they assumed the pros must know what they are talking about. Canon like any other company need professionals to shoot great images with their gear to market the possibilities to non-professionals. If enough pros start complaining, even those not knowledgable about it will start to echo those complaints creating a snowball affect.


----------



## DarkKnightNine (Apr 9, 2013)

David Hull said:


> ksagomonyants said:
> 
> 
> > Guys, I'll probably ask a very naive and somewhat a silly question... What exactly is the difference between different generations of Canon sensors? I mean, let's say Canon 5d ii and iii share the same sensor (correct?) however 5d iii overall has a better signal/noise ratio. That means that the improvements in the image quality do not necessarily require a new sensor technology? So, why do we all want Canon to have a new generation of sensors in their DSLR? Just curios
> ...




I agree with much of what you say as art is only as good as the vision of the artist. People don't pay professional photographers for their skills (as anyone can learn to master those), people pay us for our creative interpretation of a moment in time. A photographer like Lindsay Adler gets paid the big bucks for her creativity, not necessarily her technical skills. 


However I do feel that as a fashion and beauty photographer, the more resolution I have to work with, the better I am able to display my interpretation. High resolution at that price point is the ONLY reason why the Nikon D800 appealed to someone like me and why I am dying to see Canon's large megapixel offering. As a beauty and fashion photographer, you want your images to stand out and be full of crisp detail and working with more resolution helps in that sense. Other than that, I prefer Canon gear and Canon lenses. The images coming off my 1DX in low light situations is nothing short of astounding!


That being said, great artists can create with whatever tool given to them. Here is a wonderful example of a music video shot with a Canon 550D. Now if you listen to the experts, you shouldn't be able to color grade and/or add too many VFX to Canon's compressed video format, but this video completely obliterates that thinking:
http://philipbloom.net/2013/03/23/sbtrkt/


----------



## Malte_P (Apr 9, 2013)

DarkKnightNine said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > DarkKnightNine said:
> ...



eh sorry but since i discovered this forum (long before i joined) i bet 70% of what i read here are complains from so called "pros". 

it´s bitching about canon every day, no matter which thread you join.
every day at least 3 people write something like "im switching to xy".

by now it had no influence.... 
and im really tired of this unproductive brabblings.

stop talking, don´t buy canon if you want canon to notice.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 9, 2013)

DarkKnightNine said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > DarkKnightNine said:
> ...



How long ago did you take Marketing 101, and how well did you do in the class? 

I understand what you're saying, but you fail to understand they're NOT releasing the same *camera* over and over, they're reusing a good sensor in the same way automakers use the same already fuel-efficient and sufficiently powerful engine for multiple model years and across trim levels. 

Let's take your analogy - did the Final Cut Pro X fiasco affect sales of iPods and iPhones? No. This 'sensor stagnation' is something for forum posters to bitch about, but it won't affect people picking up a Rebel from the shelf at Best Buy. Also, every time someone tunes their TV to a major sporting event, they'll see lots of pros with Canon white lenses (even if none of them bought them personally). The 5DII outsold the D700 and the 5DIII is outselling the D800...so odds are, the next wedding someone goes to, they'll see a pro using Canon. Etc. 

I'm not saying Canon shouldn't improve their sensors – they should! But the idea that there will be dire consequences at the corporate level if those improvements are merely marginal is simply foolish.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 9, 2013)

Could someone please provide a list of sites or publications that have done side-by-side comparisons of Canon's 18mp sensor to the sensors being used in Nikon's new generation of crop-frame cameras. 

There seem to be a lot of drama queens here who pontificate on how much better the new generation of Nkons are, but when I've looked at sample images, I either see no discernible difference or, at higher ISOs, a little bit better performance from Canon. 

A handful of individuals on this site keep trashing the performance of the 18mp sensor and others are repeating it as fact. Since this is a site adored by gearheads, how about some objective third-party comparisons?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 9, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Could someone please provide a list of sites or publications that have done side-by-side comparisons of Canon's 18mp sensor to the sensors being used in Nikon's new generation of crop-frame cameras.
> 
> There seem to be a lot of drama queens here who pontificate on how much better the new generation of Nkons are, but when I've looked at sample images, I either see no discernible difference or, at higher ISOs, a little bit better performance from Canon.
> 
> A handful of individuals on this site keep trashing the performance of the 18mp sensor and others are repeating it as fact. Since this is a site adored by gearheads, how about some objective third-party comparisons?



You need look no further than DxOMark. After all, no one else does. 

I wonder, though...when you factor in the lenses - the 64% increase in MP count doesn't help the D800 resolve better than the 5DIII, so how much is the 33% increase of the Nikon APS-C vs. Canon's 18 MP going to help?


----------



## David Hull (Apr 9, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Could someone please provide a list of sites or publications that have done side-by-side comparisons of Canon's 18mp sensor to the sensors being used in Nikon's new generation of crop-frame cameras.
> 
> There seem to be a lot of drama queens here who pontificate on how much better the new generation of Nkons are, but when I've looked at sample images, I either see no discernible difference or, at higher ISOs, a little bit better performance from Canon.
> 
> A handful of individuals on this site keep trashing the performance of the 18mp sensor and others are repeating it as fact. Since this is a site adored by gearheads, how about some objective third-party comparisons?



The primary issue is the fact that the Canon implementation does not produce the same dynamic range as the latest Nikons as a result of increased “read-out” noise at low ISO. Most of this argument is stimulated by the DxO test results for dynamic range which you can find on their site. In addition, as one guy has pointed out, this noise tends to manifest patterns that the Nikon gear does not have. Whether this matters to you or not, depends on what you need to do with the camera. If the nature of what you shoot and your PP workflow requires that you consistently lift shadows a couple stops, then you may run into this issue, otherwise it is probably no big deal.

The way I look at it, the Canon gear as presently implemented, does not offer the same latitude for exposure correction that some of the later Nikon stuff does. You can search the web for Canon 5DII banding and you will see a lot of examples. You need to decide whether this is a problem or not in your opinion, related to your own photography. I have sort of a funny perspective on it which is that (IMO anyway), most of the examples show what you can do if you use the Canon gear incorrectly. In almost every case where a comparison is given, if the Canon gear were used properly the same image could be made with both. Now for the artsy fartsy part: IMO, in most cases, the image wasn’t worth making in the first place -- it is nothing more than an example of what happens if you push the canon into the region where it doesn’t work well. Basically, “doc… it hurts when I do this” to which the doc replies, “don’t do that”. Unfortunately there are some cases where you have to “do that” in which case… for now anyway, go buy a Nikon.

I ground through this thought process myself recently and then bought a 5DIII. In the end I thought that the things that they DID improve were worth the upgrade to me and any sensor deficiencies were easy to work around. I had a 5DII (probably the worst offender in the "banding" department) and never had problems with the so-called "issue". I am not saying that they don't need to fix it, but I would rather that they take their time and do it right (don't break something else in the process -- as sometimes happens).


----------



## rpt (Apr 9, 2013)

David Hull said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Could someone please provide a list of sites or publications that have done side-by-side comparisons of Canon's 18mp sensor to the sensors being used in Nikon's new generation of crop-frame cameras.
> ...


Very well said. Let us not get back into analysing shots of sheds with white sides facing the sun and having dark insides...


----------



## ecka (Apr 9, 2013)

I think it may be a new canon mirrorless announcement


----------



## bseitz234 (Apr 9, 2013)

ecka said:


> I think it may be a new canon mirrorless announcement


and I think it may be a 7d2 that shoots 12fps, has 1dIV level weather sealing, 82pt-AF, APS-H with 5d3-like ISO noise, for $1800. :


----------



## ecka (Apr 9, 2013)

bseitz234 said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > I think it may be a new canon mirrorless announcement
> ...



Nice wishful thinking ;D. I wouldn't bet on it, but I hope it's close to that .


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 9, 2013)

weixing said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



+1

the XXD line market is targeted towards basically the same market as the rebel - only difference is the XXD targets first time DSLR buyers with a little more disposable income


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> DarkKnightNine said:
> 
> 
> > But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. *The average consumer may not notice or even care*, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!
> ...



Yup! when the vast majority of the people buying this body will not know what an AF point is, much less how to manipulate them, or know what a cross type point is you don't have to innovate too much...

Hate to say it, but the XXd line and the rebel line would benefit more from instagram filters than an updated sensor...


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 9, 2013)

dilbert said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > > Ask yourself this: have you ever been able to walk through a gallery and point out which camera shot which photo? If the stuff was as bad as some of these idiots claim, nobody would use it.
> ...


----------



## unfocused (Apr 9, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > DarkKnightNine said:
> ...



I must disagree with this condescending attitude. I think most DLSR buyers are buying the cameras because, for a variety of reasons, they are not satisfied with the quality of images they are getting from their iPhones, their fixed lens compacts or their point and shoots. 

Rebel buyers are very likely to be price-limited, but that does not make them stupid or incompetent. They may be new to DSLRs, but there is something about the format that they find desirable. Traditionally, this has been the ability to change lenses, but there can be other factors, such as the larger sensor size, sharper lenses, viewfinder, etc., etc. 

It would be a major mistake for any company to treat their customers as stupid and Canon hasn't become the industry leader by making mistakes. 

Here is something that people just have a hard time accepting: Canon's 18mp sensor is very good. It is more than adequate for 99.9% of shooting conditions. Can it be improved? Of course. Will it be improved? Of course. But, even 3 1/2 years after introduction, it can hold it's own against the latest sensors used by Nikon. It is not that Rebel or XXD users are inept and therefore can be sold inferior goods. It's that the product is only inferior in the minds of a handful of people who get their jollies from looking for insignificant flaws.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 9, 2013)

docsmith said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



interesting....


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 9, 2013)

DarkKnightNine said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > DarkKnightNine said:
> ...



Maybe the pros aren't as disappointed as you may think?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 9, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



it's not condescending. It's the reality of the market. I can count way more times someone with their brand new (fill in the blank between $500-1500) camera comes up to me and asks me...just gott his...how do i...

I take a look and notice that more times than not ---all AF points are still selected, and the camera is in green auto everything mode. If they are on a canon, I generally show them...this is how you do X, and this is how you do Y, and this is how you set Z...at some point while telling them this I ask them if they read their manual, and they say no - and it's really surprising how many of them do not even know where their manual is! 

I had a cousin of my fiancee call me asking for advice...her choice was between a sony and a canon t series...I recommended the canon and she bought the sony...over christmas she was visiting and guess what she asks me...how do I do anything on this...the sony UI is like foreign language..I deciphered a few things and hated the controls...when asked where is the manual...she said she lost it...I told her to DL the manual and that will explain a lot.

LOL... If i did not run into that situation as much as I did, I would not state what I stated.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 9, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> resolve better?
> its clearly so that d800 resolves more than 5dmk3 with the right lens



It's déjà vu all over again. Yes, with _the right lens_. But on average, across a large group of lenses, the D800 cannot out-resolve the 5DIII, according to DxO. 



dilbert said:


> It is also about DR and cleanliness of the raw image.



Sign next to Nikon dSLR at Best Buy: "Great DR and clean RAW."

Comment by 'average consumer' overheard: "Well, if I was one-a them vegan-types that ate only raw foods, I'd sure as heck need a great doctor! Think I'll check out that Canon over there..."


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 10, 2013)

Do you really want to see what happens when you go from a 20 or 22 megapixel sensor to a 46 megapixel sensor? Do you want to see how the lens affects sensor sharpness? Take your lens, mount it on your FF camera, take a photo that shows off sharpness. Then take that lens, mount it on a Rebel, and do the same. You will find that only lenses of superior sharpness will give you a sharp image on your Rebel...... and that is what will happen when you go full frame high megapixel....

Unless you have a camera bag full of the finest L-glass, you can rant on and on about which sensor and which camera outresolves who..... but out in the real world most people have bought into a SYSTEM.... and by far the most important part and the most expensive part of that system is the glass.... 

You can take the crappiest Nikon DSLR, put a high end lens on it, and it will outresolve the finest Canon camera with a kit lens. Likewise, take the crappiest Canon, put on some high end L-glass, and it will outresolve the finest Nikon with a kit lens.

You want to know the order of things? 
#1 - photographer
#2 - glass
#3 - camera

..... and the glass is an investment while the camera can be best thought of as expendable.

Sorry for the rant, but this thread has degenerated into another DXO/SENSOR/NIKON/CANON arguefest, most of which has nothing to do with the topic at hand..


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 10, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Do you really want to see what happens when you go from a 20 or 22 megapixel sensor to a 46 megapixel sensor? Do you want to see how the lens affects sensor sharpness? Take your lens, mount it on your FF camera, take a photo that shows off sharpness. Then take that lens, mount it on a Rebel, and do the same. You will find that only lenses of superior sharpness will give you a sharp image on your Rebel...... and that is what will happen when you go full frame high megapixel....
> 
> Unless you have a camera bag full of the finest L-glass, you can rant on and on about which sensor and which camera outresolves who..... but out in the real world most people have bought into a SYSTEM.... and by far the most important part and the most expensive part of that system is the glass....
> 
> ...



+100


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 10, 2013)

[quote author=DxOMark]
*Perceptual MPix: a much simpler tool to score and compare lenses*
P-Mpix is the unit of a sharpness measurement. The number of P-Mpix of a camera/lens combination is equal to the pixel count of a sensor that would give the same sharpness if tested with a perfect theoretical optics, as the camera/lens combination under test.
For example, if a camera with a sensor of 24Mpix when used with a given lens has a P-Mpix of 18MPix, it means that somewhere in the optical system 6Mpix are lost, in the sense that as an observer you will not perceive the additional sharpness that these 6Mpix should have added to the photos if everything was perfect.
[/quote]

According to DxOMark, the best prime and best zoom from each are:

Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II on 5DIII - 22 P-Mpix
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G on D800 - 22 P-Mpix

Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II on 5DIII - 21 P-Mpix
Nikon 70-200mm f/4G ED VR on D800 - 21 P-Mpix

So, by DxO's criteria and definition, Canon's best prime and zoom lens are basically not limiting system resolution (within a 1 MP margin of error). However, Nikon's best prime and zoom on the D800 are resulting in the 'loss' of 14-15 MP....resulting in a perceived sharpness of even Nikon's best lenses on the D800 as no better than Canon's best lenses. 

Interestingly, while the D800 appears to be 'too much' for Nikon lenses in that the lenses are clearly limiting overall system resolution, we don't know from these data if we're at the limit of the Canon lenses.


----------



## BrettS (Apr 10, 2013)

I hear the noise of someone rustling about with chart papers...


----------



## rpt (Apr 10, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Do you really want to see what happens when you go from a 20 or 22 megapixel sensor to a 46 megapixel sensor? Do you want to see how the lens affects sensor sharpness? Take your lens, mount it on your FF camera, take a photo that shows off sharpness. Then take that lens, mount it on a Rebel, and do the same. You will find that only lenses of superior sharpness will give you a sharp image on your Rebel...... and that is what will happen when you go full frame high megapixel....
> ...


Yup! A +100 from me too.


----------



## mjbehnke (Apr 10, 2013)

I think that is why Canon has been doing alot of len upgrades. I think they are making sure that users who will buy a Big MP body will be able to get results out of it via the new L glass. Just MHO, but I think Canon is smart to upgrade glass first.


----------



## pj1974 (Apr 10, 2013)

mjbehnke said:


> I think that is why Canon has been doing alot of len upgrades. I think they are making sure that users who will buy a Big MP body will be able to get results out of it via the new L glass. Just MHO, but I think Canon is smart to upgrade glass first.



+1 I have been thinking along the same lines as this, above.

Canon has made some very good moves regarding digital photography in the past (eg first in FFs, first DSLR with video and live-view, etc).

So the idea of first getting a suitable amount of high quality lenses to get the most of any increased MP DSLRs (particularly FF) makes a lot of sense to me.

When I upgraded from an 8MP 350D to a 18MP 7D, the requirement for better glass to get the most out of the increased resolution / sensor was clear to me. I now have high quality lenses covering 10mm to 300mm, including Canon L glass too.

Regards

Paul


----------



## David Hull (Apr 10, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Do you really want to see what happens when you go from a 20 or 22 megapixel sensor to a 46 megapixel sensor? Do you want to see how the lens affects sensor sharpness? Take your lens, mount it on your FF camera, take a photo that shows off sharpness. Then take that lens, mount it on a Rebel, and do the same. You will find that only lenses of superior sharpness will give you a sharp image on your Rebel...... and that is what will happen when you go full frame high megapixel....
> 
> Unless you have a camera bag full of the finest L-glass, you can rant on and on about which sensor and which camera outresolves who..... but out in the real world most people have bought into a SYSTEM.... and by far the most important part and the most expensive part of that system is the glass....
> 
> ...



Yep... I don't know why people can't figure this out. This sort of thinking used to be common sense in teh film days.

+1 for sure.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 10, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > According to DxOMark, the best prime and best zoom from each are:
> ...



Grasping at straws, are we? I was comparing Nikon vs. Canon lenses, and last time I checked, Nikon doesn't make the Sigma 35/1.4. 

Ok, so with that excellent lens not made by Nikon, the D800 is only throwing away 13 MP instead of 14 MP. Woot.


----------



## roguewave (Apr 10, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> According to DxOMark, the best prime and best zoom from each are:
> 
> Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II on 5DIII - 22 P-Mpix
> Nikon 85mm f/1.4G on D800 - 22 P-Mpix
> ...



Something is not right with these numbers.

For example, Canon 40D's 10 MP sensor would be 25.6 MP, if enlarged to FF size (10 * 1.6 * 1.6). Similarly, 7D's-FF equivalent sensor would contain 46 MP.

Yet, 7D shows markedly better resolution than 40D in combination with the same lenses. In fact, with quite a few lenses, not only the very best ones.

So, if these systems benefit from increased pixel density from 25.6 to 46 MP FF sensor equivalent, how can the best lenses be the limiting factor at 21-22 MP? Or am I misunderstanding something?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 10, 2013)

roguewave said:


> Aomething is not right with these numbers.
> 
> For example, Canon 40D's 10 MP sensor would be 25.6 MP, if enlarged to FF size (10 * 1.6 * 1.6). Similarly, 7D's-FF equivalent sensor would contain 46 MP.
> 
> ...



Pixel density isn't the only factor - sensor size matters.


----------



## bseitz234 (Apr 11, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Woot.


Oh come on, put some excitement into your sarcastic owl calls!


----------



## roguewave (Apr 11, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> roguewave said:
> 
> 
> > Aomething is not right with these numbers.
> ...



Can you elaborate, please? I mean, if you were to take a hypothetical 25.6 MP FF sensor and use scissors to trim it by a factor of 1.6 in each dimension, you'd end up with a 10 MP APS-C sensor. Using the same lens, there should be no difference how it resolves before and after trimming, right?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 11, 2013)

roguewave said:


> Can you elaborate, please? I mean, if you were to take a hypothetical 25.6 MP FF sensor and use scissors to trim it by a factor of 1.6 in each dimension, you'd end up with a 10 MP APS-C sensor. Using the same lens, there should be no difference how it *resolves* before and after trimming, right?



P-Mpix isn't a measure of resolution, although resolution is a contributing factor. Resolution ≠ sharpness. A true measure of spatial resolution involves a physical distance. Usual units are line pairs / mm (LP/mm). For a spatially normalized measure in LP/mm, the higher density sensor will outresolve the lower density sensor. 

However, that's a per-unit basis - and that's not how we look at images. MTF50, a commonly used measure of sharpness, is reported in line pairs / picture height (LP/PH). In that case, the greater 'height' of a FF sensor means higher values. You can see that on photozone.de - when you compare a lens on FF vs. APS-C, the MTF50 values will be higher for the 5DII tests than the 50D tests, despite the higher pixel density of the 50D. This isn't just a numerical phenomenon - take a look at the TDP comparison of two 18 MP sensors, the 1D X vs. the 7D (same lens, the 200/2L IS at f/4). The 1D X is producing a noticeably sharper image.

P-Mpix isn't exactly measuring sharpness, either. It's basically a measure derived from subjective quality factor (SQF), which simply put is an MTF measurement that's adjusted to match human perception (the psychophysical basis is that humans percieve some spatial frequencies better than others, and viewing distance is relevant to perception of sharpness, too). 

That difference you see in TDP's ISO 12233 crops can be measured by SQF, and that's basically what P-Mpix is telling you. For example, the Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II that delivers 22 P-Mpix on the 5DIII achieves only 14 P-Mpix on the 7D. In fact, the 300mm f/4L IS at $1400 delivers better perceived sharpness on the 5DIII than the $7000 supertele lens on the 7D.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Overheard today:
> 
> "My wife wants to buy Canon because it has touch screen."
> 
> ...


Maybe that feature helps that lady to take better pictures


----------



## David Hull (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Overheard today:
> 
> "My wife wants to buy Canon because it has touch screen."
> 
> ...



The real answer to that is the so-called "IQ" of the Canon equipment is essentially the same as that of Nikon (Pentax, Sony, Oly..., pick your favorite). The output of the equipment when used properly will be essentially indistinguishable. So she was correct, pick the gear based on price and feature set. 

It is anyone’s guess as to why Canon has not bothered to make changes to their implementation but one valid guess is that they see no urgent need to fix something that isn’t really broke. Canon is successful because the equipment does an admirable job of producing stunning images that can hold their own against any of the rest.


----------



## Skulker (Apr 11, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> ............
> That difference you see in TDP's ISO 12233 crops can be measured by SQF, and that's basically what P-Mpix is telling you. For example, the Canon 300mm f/2.8L IS II that delivers 22 P-Mpix on the 5DIII achieves only 14 P-Mpix on the 7D. .............



And that's why I was pleasantly surprised not to miss the crop factor on switching to 1Dx from 7D. Actually it's what made me trade in the 7D for the 5D3 as back up. (Not that the 7D has suddenly become a poor camera, I still have plenty of shots taken with it that I love)


----------



## J.R. (Apr 11, 2013)

Hobby Shooter said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Overheard today:
> ...



+1

Everyone's needs and perceptions are different - for some people a touch-screen can be a deal-maker.


----------



## insanitybeard (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> No, she didn't care about picture quality. The 650D could have produced images half as good as the Nikon but the touch screen, well that's just like new phone that has a touch screen and "iPad" that has a touch screen, so why would anyone want one of those prehistoric things with knobs and stuff?



Has DxOMark quantified that the Canon images are only 50% as good as the Nikon?


----------



## insanitybeard (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> You're not listening (and/or perhaps you didn't properly comprehend what I wrote.)
> 
> All that mattered was that one camera had a touch screen and the other didn't. MP be damned.



Ok, I hold my hands up. I didn't properly comprehend what you wrote. However, your anti Canon stance on this forum frankly has become a tad tedious, and I don't think I speak solely for myself when I say that. I am not for a moment saying that we shouldn't complain or raise issue with things that we dislike about Canon cameras. But the manner of some of your postings suggests you have some grudge against Canon. Or am I again misunderstanding you?


----------



## J.R. (Apr 11, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> Has DxOMark quantified that the Canon images are only 50% as good as the Nikon?



Yes .... only 50% as good, but only for images where the lens cap has NOT been removed ;D


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Apr 11, 2013)

insanitybeard said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > You're not listening (and/or perhaps you didn't properly comprehend what I wrote.)
> ...


----------



## insanitybeard (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> If I was going to have a grudge, it would be because of something it them taking 4 tries to Canon's lens repair service to fix the IS in a 70-300 IS USM (non-L).
> 
> "Yeah we fixed it", "No you haven't, try again." "Fixed it this time.", "Put on a camera and it didn't work, try again." la la la
> 
> No, the point of me saying this is because lots of people are arguing that "Canon cameras sell well, so obviously 18MP is enough" or "... so obviously the DR isn't important." In a sense they're right, but it appears that it isn't the IQ that is selling the camera - it is the bells and whistles. When the reason for choosing a 650D over something else is the touch screen, then as long as the camera has enough pixels for facebook and WiFi to upload, well who cares about PASM, etc?



Ok, so you had poor service. I'm sorry that happenned, but that's not exclusive to Canon.

Personally, I welcome improvements to IQ and DR, as I'm sure many here do. The bells and whistles don't interest me either, but I accept that in todays social networking culture they will interest many, and Canon is going where it thinks the money is. That's business.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> No, not grasping at straws, just simply considering all of the lenses that are available for a camera. If you want to limit yourself to only those lenses that the camera vendor makes, fine, but don't impose those restrictions on others.
> 
> There are many fine lenses that are made for use on Canon/Nikon that are not made by Canon/Nikon.



The grasping at straws part was more about the fact that considering the Sigma 35/1.4 gets you barely a marginal improvement, as I said - throwing away 13 MP instead of 14 MP.



dilbert said:


> If I was going to have a grudge, it would be because of something it them taking 4 tries to Canon's lens repair service to fix the IS in a 70-300 IS USM (non-L).
> 
> "Yeah we fixed it", "No you haven't, try again." "Fixed it this time.", "Put on a camera and it didn't work, try again." la la la



And with Nikon, that might be *<wait 4 weeks>* "Yeah we fixed it", "No you haven't, try again."*<wait 4 weeks>* "Fixed it this time.", "Put on a camera and it didn't work, try again."*<wait 4 weeks>* la la la



dilbert said:


> No, the point of me saying this is because lots of people are arguing that "Canon cameras sell well, so obviously 18MP is enough" or "... so obviously the DR isn't important." In a sense they're right, but it appears that it isn't the IQ that is selling the camera - it is the bells and whistles.



In a sense? No need for a qualifier there. As I've stated before, people buy *cameras* not sensors. Their reasons for choosing one camera over another are as varied as the people themselves. Canon recognizes that people buy cameras, not naked sensors, and they design their cameras accordingly. The fact that they continue to outsell Nikon across the lineup quite clearly indicates that they know what they're doing in terms of camera design (including the sensor). 

Saying 'it isn't the IQ that is selling the camera' is an unrealistic over-generalization. The problem is that some people seem to suggest that simply because the sensor in a Nikon camera offers a couple of extra stops of DR, that means the IQ of the sensor in a Canon camera is unacceptably poor. It's that sort of attitude that raises hackles around here, and for good reason - it's complete crap. If you want to peddle that line of BS, try a Nikon forum...I'm sure you'd be welcomed with open arms.


----------



## AG (Apr 11, 2013)

Wow this thread went off the rails faster than most.

Or in the words of Ron Burgundy...







;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> A 2% difference.



Well, if that's not grasping at straws, what is? :




dilbert said:


> You're assuming that all Canon turn-a-rounds were speedy...



True. But Roger Cicala's repair data indicate an average (in the USA) of 6 days for Canon vs. 26 days for Nikon. Or, since you seem to like percentages, *433%* longer for a Nikon repair in the US, on average.




dilbert said:


> Or in other words, Canon seems to be ignoring the photographer and going for the consumer (which kind of agrees with your statement above.)



Oh, I see. Consumers don't care about IQ, but _Photographers_ do, so they should all be using Nikon. Wait, did I say that? Somehow, I don't think so...

If you think Nikon has better sensor DR because they aren't 'ignoring the photographer', you're being terribly naive. Canon and Nikon are publically traded companies. Neither of them 'care about photographers' except insofar as photographers are consumers that buy their products. Canon and Nikon care about profit. In some countries (the US being one), it goes beyond caring - publically held compaines are legally obligated to maximize profit. Canon just seems to be doing a better job at that, based on corporate reports.




dilbert said:


> It's not that it is poor but rather that there has been no improvement and it isn't as if there are no problems that need fixing.



No, there are problems that _you want_ fixed (and so do I, admittedly). Important distinction. But they can clearly outsell Nikon despite those 'problems' so the only voice that matters - the market - has decided there no _need_ to fix anything.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Nikon is approaching the problem of maximising profit by providing products that give maximum benefit to the photographer that cares about the quality of their photograph in the belief that this is the #1 priority for camera purchases.



See, I just knew there was a reason for the oil spatters on the D600 sensor. Nikon cares about the quality of the photographs. 

Tell me...does that strategy apply to their lenses, too? If so, why is a Sigma lens an oh-so-significant 2% better? I suppose because Nikon tried but failed.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Right, because the majority of the people buying the cameras are _consumers_ and not _photographers_.



News flash. The majority of photographers don't dare about the crap being discussed here.


----------



## David Hull (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> insanitybeard said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



At the entry level, that is probably true, since the IQ is good enough for what most people want to do with it. However even at the enthusiast level, the differences in the so-called "IQ" of these cameras aren’t sufficiently different to matter as much as the differences in the overall systems. Or, for that matter, the cost of changing systems or the inconvenience of adding a Nikon body and lens kit to a Canon system just to get 6 dB additional SNR in the deepest shadows and then ONLY if your gain is set at ISO=100.

I recently changed out my 5DII for a 5DIII with full knowledge (having participated in these threads for years) of the so-called "IQ" differences, what they stem from and what they mean to real world camera performance for the sorts of things I generally do. It would have cost me $10k to add a D800 and a couple of “L” equivalent Nikon lenses good enough to make good use of all its capabilities. Similarly it would have cost me around $15k to change systems (leaving the Devil I know for the Devil I don’t so-to-speak). So... I am going to do that for 6 dB more SNR at ISO 100 and 15 more MP (along with larger files, slower frame rate etc.)? It doesn’t even make sense. I don’t think that I am alone in this perspective, even at what seems to be an elevated price, the 5DIII (despite its mostly imagined IQ deficiencies) seems to be selling quite well (particularly now that the street price seems to have dropped).


----------



## David Hull (Apr 11, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > No, not grasping at straws, just simply considering all of the lenses that are available for a camera. If you want to limit yourself to only those lenses that the camera vendor makes, fine, but don't impose those restrictions on others.
> ...



_"The problem is that some people seem to suggest that simply because the sensor in a Nikon camera offers a couple of extra stops of DR, that means the IQ of the sensor in a Canon camera is unacceptably poor."_

I absolutely agree and this is the primary reason that I jump into these discussions. IMO those who make these sorts of comments are either clueless, have some sort of personal agenda to grind or… they just haven’t figured out how to use a camera yet. 

I have no issue with someone commenting that the Canon Read Noise is worse or the Sony/Nikon DR is better (or the resolution is better one way or the other if that is your hot-button) but this broad generalization that somehow Canon Image Quality is worse in some sort of general sense is utter nonsense, it generates unnecessary FUD which has no place whatsoever on a forum where people hopefully want to get to the facts to make educated decisions (or just understand how the damn thing works). It is my opinion that in the general sense of the mostly undefined concept of “IQ” most current cameras are pretty much equal.


----------



## David Hull (Apr 11, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> David, I have compared 5dmk2 with 5dmk3 (and so have others) and what do you think about the high iso reproduction.
> I took this pictures few minutes ago, and it is 5dmk2 12800iso and d800
> what has impressed me is the d800 high iso reproduction
> When the 5dmk3 came out I did a lot of comparison and did not se any big advantage regarding high iso compared to 5dmk2 , what I saw was something who looks like pre cocked 5dmk3 raw files compared to 5dmk2 with less visual noise but not more details .
> here is 12800 iso and both cameras metering system gave the same value time and f-stop and they are exposed the same= 1/640sec F1,4 and handled in CR the same= high lights information and shadows details, the d800 file are downsized to 5dmk2



What is the point of downsizing? I think that your test is biased in favor of the Nikon since downsizing will make the noise look better. The problem with Nikon for me is that they came along with too little, too late. If they had had the best camera when I bought the 20D 8 years ago, I would be a Nikon shooter but they did not.

As for what do I think about your test? The Nikon image looks better, but I know nothing about what that means in the real world, how big are you going to print the image, what is it used for, am I allowed to make that same image at ISO 100 using a tripod with the 5DII, etc., etc.? This is yet another example of a contrived test, purpose built to make the tester’s point. I could take that same 5DII, change the settings, put it on a tripod if need be and make an image that would blow your D800 image out of the water. You could do the same with the D800 and get a better image as well. In the end when both cameras were optimally used, the images would probably be indistinguishable. IMO, there is nothing about this image that requires a D800.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 11, 2013)

Another thread turns into a DR whinging exercise. 

Its not surprising really, it seems to be happening to a couple of threads daily - post underexposed shots, lift shadows by 5 stops, post 100% crops, claim that Canon cameras are shiite and the regular blah blah blah blah!


----------



## El Funesto (Apr 11, 2013)

Hi there,
I am new on the forum and actually, this discussion kind of summarize my current dilemma. 
Indeed, I want to acquire my first digital DLSR. I am kind of an enthusiastic user, still quite naive, planning to take lessons, I like to shoot animals (birds, insects and... my kids  ), etc.
As a kind of a geek, and with a budget around 3k$ (for body + lenses), what should I go for ? Long ago I had a Canon, so my first idea was to go for Canon. Then, the Nikon D7100 impressed me a lot, with many interesting features. On the other hand, I plan to buy nice gears little by little and Canon's seem better.
At my level, I think that the sensor matters little, it will probably outperform what I need and the gears I will buy initially. Solidity is important. Some features of the D7100 seem ideal for birds, etc (AF, crop factor, speed of shutter, high ISO quality). From what is announced, Canon novelties will either not provide the same built as the D7100 (70D) or will be much more expensive (7DII). 
I plan to buy my camera at the end of the year, hence I will have time to see what happen until then. But if I had to decide today, I would probably go for D7100 since it is approximately the same price as 7D, but more recent and with some interesting features.

So I was wondering if you experts think that my thinking is correct or not (and yes, I know that a D7100 or 7D is probably too much for me, but they are appealing to me !).
I am also curious about your opinion on this matter: is Canon loosing some new potential enthusiastic clients by not improving enough their camera ?


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



How many nikon shooters do you know and what do they shoot? Of the nikon shooters I know who shoot weddings, only a few of them have the d800 (and the biggest dislike is the file size, second dislike is that things get mushy after ISO 6400). Most are shooting the d700, and if they upgrade its to a d3 or a d3s. Most will say the d800 is a fine camera but the files are much too large - most of them wanted the d800 to be more like the d700, or should I say - the 5d3...modest and easy to manage file sizes and good low light performance. So I don't think that really fits in with you standpoint of:

"Let me put it another way. Nikon is approaching the problem of maximising profit by providing products that give maximum benefit to the photographer that cares about the quality of their photograph in the belief that this is the #1 priority for camera purchases. Canon approaches the problem by adding bells and whistles that attract people whilst delivering a camera with a "good enough" attitude to photography itself."

I'd put it this way - Nikon is attempting to increase its market share by offering a product that is different than it's competition, it occupies a niche that current cannons can't touch. It has a WOW factor with the unusally high MP count, which is something that turns heads - and they most likely offered it at a significantly lower profit margin because they are playing catch up. Canon on the other hand did their research and determined that other features were more important to their users than DR and resolution - high ISO, improved AF, and with the 1dx fps). 

Now that's on the higher end of both companies products ---you brought up the 650d and how you overheard someone say they wanted it because it has a touch screen! Well, isn't that what the rebel-the xxd market is? 

Even from a professional photgraphers standpoint looking in at my potential clients, big prints are nice but most just want web friendly digital files. So these bells and whistles that you criticize are exactly what the average upgrading from my phone to a real camera want. I got scolded here for appearing to be condescending because I called this out ---fact is most people - nikon buying or canon buying - that are buying these lower level dslr's will most likely be shooting in live mode, auto everything. Most will find using the OVF odd and weird. Most will not know what an AF point is. Most will lose their manual. Most will have a kit lens and thats that! Is that a bad thing? No, because for what most users need it's good enough - whether is an entry level canon, nikon, pentak, olympus, sony, etc ,etc ,etc. Most of these people want nice pics of their kids in the yard, or at the birthday parties or their school play. Most will never visit a site like this for more information. Most will never have heard of DXO, most will not have any clue what a histogram is, most will not view MTF charts....

I get that your disgruntled with canon, but come on man. Give it a rest...


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 11, 2013)

oh, and news flash ---that big old list of lens performance - the real unfortunate reality is that most of these decisions that we dissect and mull over --- unless your working for a magazine, or shooting for billboards - who is seeing our images? Our clients, who are generally, normal people. 

I was sitting here with my fiancee, showing her the difference between my 5d3 files 6d files (I rented a 6d), and she could tell no difference (and she has to sit through a lot of showings of my stuff because she's my fiancee). 

Same goes with lenses. the standard person isn't going to see half the things we see with our images. Even when you get to fast primes - yeah, they will love the waythe background blurs, but that little difference between the bokeh from a non L prime to an L prime, will they notice that? Will they say, wow, the bokeh is so creamy and smooth? No, what will sell the shot is the composition and the feel of the image - and for the client ---- how you interact with the client trumps the IQ. If you make them laugh, make them feel comfortable, make them laugh - most people don't really like being in front of the lens so if you can get them comfortable that trumps IQ every day of the week.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 11, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> ... if you can get them comfortable that trumps IQ every day of the week.



Wait just a minute. You seem to be suggesting that the photographer is an important component of making a good picture. I hope I'm misinterpreting your statements, because frankly, they're complete heresy around here. Fall to your knees and worship the Almighty DR of the Exmor Sensor. That, and only that, will be Salvation for your images. If you can't cleanly lift 5 stops of shadows, you're a poor excuse for a photographer not to mention a failure as a human being.

:


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 11, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > ... if you can get them comfortable that trumps IQ every day of the week.
> ...



LOL!!! I forgot where I am...lol. I retract all of that...because now after a shoot, I send my RAWS to DXO and they map out my images on a graph and that's how my clients pick their keepers...lol


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 11, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Right, because the majority of the people buying the cameras are _consumers_ and not _photographers_.



ummmm....... ALL photographers are consumers, and all consumers who purchase cameras and take at least one picture are photographers.....


----------



## ecka (Apr 11, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Right, because the majority of the people buying the cameras are _consumers_ and not _photographers_.
> ...



NO, those are just snapshooters ;D
The real photographer is a person who actually knows what he is doing 
I've seen a monkey taking pictures of tourists, was it a photographer too?


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 11, 2013)

ecka said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



nobody qualified skill levels.... Pro's, amateurs, snapshooters, enthusiasts, and even (GASP!!!!) people with cell phones are photographers. nobody mentioned if they knew what they were doing or if they are any good at it....


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 11, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



I would think that's part and parcel to the whole debate. I wouldn't consider anybody who snaps a shot as a "photographer" - just as I would not consider myself to be a "plumber" because I bought a wrench and replaced a gasket on my sink. Just as I would not consider myself to be a "carpenter" because I put together a table. Just as I would not consider myself an "auto technician" because I changed my oil by myself.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 11, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Just as I would not consider myself to be a "carpenter" because I put together a table.



Damn. I just put together an IKEA table for the deck. Guess that means I'll have to cancel that business card order I placed.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 11, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



Photographer is a nebulous term. There is no standard definition... there is no certification or levels.... there is no governing body and there is no rating system of specialties. For example, I could be the world's greatest bird photographer and the worst imaginable wedding photographer... I know people so good that they can effortlessly snap off a shot that I would have to take time to prepare for.... and that "snapshooter" would get a better picture than me. I also know "experts" whose photographs are "somewhat less than stellar".

In the absence of standards, like it or not, anyone who uses a camera is a photographer and the question of if they are good or bad comes down to opinion.


----------



## ecka (Apr 11, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Well, I have no problem with calling a photographer whoever is pretending to be one, but it doesn't make their photographs any better. The problem rises when they start asking money for it, just like that monkey ;D


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 12, 2013)

ecka said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Photographer is a nebulous term. There is no standard definition... there is no certification or levels.... there is no governing body and there is no rating system of specialties. For example, I could be the world's greatest bird photographer and the worst imaginable wedding photographer... I know people so good that they can effortlessly snap off a shot that I would have to take time to prepare for.... and that "snapshooter" would get a better picture than me. I also know "experts" whose photographs are "somewhat less than stellar".
> ...



One of the problems is that it isn't even clear which is the best photograph..... Hypothetical situation.... a cougar is sighted "down by the stream". Neuro, my Neice, and I head off to get a picture.... Neuro with a 1Dx and a 600F4, me with a 60D and a 70-200, and my neice with an iPod. Neuro finds a nice vantage spot and shoots of a couple hundred perfect pictures..... I work my way downstream and get a couple hundred pictures of the cougar nicely framed in front of a waterfall, but because of the distance my pictures are heavily cropped. My neice got bored and waited in the car. When we get back to town and process the pictures the great debate starts.... which is the better picture? Neuro's are definitly sharper and more pixels on target, but mine are more artisticly framed....and while we argue my neice sells the 30 iPod pictures of bigfoot, that she took while waiting in the car, to a tabloid.

So which is better? Technical, artistic, or commercial sucess?


----------



## ecka (Apr 12, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



That depends on a buyer, I guess.

P.S. So, who was pretending to be a bigfoot, you or Neuro?


----------



## David Hull (Apr 12, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> So David, please dont tell me that there are any differences between the two sensor, and now at 12800iso, we all know the difference at base iso and DR.
> If you will look at the rawfiles I can send them to you



I never said that there was no difference. Don't need raw files, I have looked at RAW files in the past.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Apr 12, 2013)

ecka said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



And more importantly, why does sasquatches only live in US?


----------



## David Hull (Apr 12, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> So David, please dont tell me that there are any differences between the two sensor, and now at 12800iso, we all know the difference at base iso and DR.
> If you will look at the rawfiles I can send them to you



Just out of curiosity, I set up a similar comparison on the DPR site and there is very little difference between the images. IMO, none of the three cameras (D800, 5DII and 5DIII) produces a decent image at 12800. All your test shows is that you can take two perfectly good cameras and make bad images with them and argue about which is worst. I would rather make two optimal images and compare that -- no rules; you can do whatever you want. That is, after all, how the equipment is actually used in real life.


----------



## David Hull (Apr 12, 2013)

Hobby Shooter said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...


Taxes are lower.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Apr 12, 2013)

David Hull said:


> Hobby Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...


Three we have it.


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Apr 12, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Just as I would not consider myself to be a "carpenter" because I put together a table.
> ...


By all means, don't! I'm from Sweden and by birthright we can all certify foreigners for their IKEA skills. Consider yourself a certified table assembler... Congratulations


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 12, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



To bring this back to the point -



ecka said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



I'll just say it like this 

Yes, all photographers are consumers - but, some consumers just buy cameras - that doesn't necessarily make them photographers. Yeah yeah yeah its a nebulous term. But, many trades are learned by apprenticing. Like plumbing - you learn from a plumber...again, just because I buy a wrench and replace a gasket that doesn't make me a plumber. Just because you buy a camera and snap a few shots, that doesn't make you a photographer. That's the point the original person was making. It's a dividing line between those who are serious and willing to learn and those that buy it cause its fancy - the latter cares about what the specs really mean, the former says that # is bigger than the other so it must be better.


----------



## ecka (Apr 12, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Exactly. There are cameras for non-photographers with shooting modes like "dog", "cat", "baby", "flower", "tree", "fireworks", etc.


----------



## RocklandDragon (Apr 12, 2013)

So...any word on what's happenin' on April 23rd? Could it be the unveiling of the 70D or 7D Mark II?


----------



## iKenndac (Apr 12, 2013)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> Yes, all photographers are consumers - but, some consumers just buy cameras - that doesn't necessarily make them photographers. Yeah yeah yeah its a nebulous term. But, many trades are learned by apprenticing. Like plumbing - you learn from a plumber...again, just because I buy a wrench and replace a gasket that doesn't make me a plumber. Just because you buy a camera and snap a few shots, that doesn't make you a photographer. That's the point the original person was making. It's a dividing line between those who are serious and willing to learn and those that buy it cause its fancy - the latter cares about what the specs really mean, the former says that # is bigger than the other so it must be better.



Perhaps more succinctly: Just because you can write doesn't make you a writer.


----------



## David Hull (Apr 12, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> David Hull said:
> 
> 
> > ankorwatt said:
> ...


To me, this makes more sense as it is closer to what I am used to seeing in comparisons I have made -- not that I spend a lot of time on such endeavors but I am curious like everyone else. I look at the two cameras from the images provided by the review sites, from the perspective of the measurement data on DxO, B. Claff, Sensorgen etc. and once you get the gain up so the low ISO read noise s out of the picture (pun intended, I guess), the images are comparable (IMO). Most of the time (in practice) I would never run it at 12800 anyway and as you dial it down closer to the reality of where I would run it, moves even closer, which was my real point. I am not surprised that the Nikon is that good, IMO, the measurement data says it should be.


----------



## roguewave (Apr 14, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> roguewave said:
> 
> 
> > Can you elaborate, please? I mean, if you were to take a hypothetical 25.6 MP FF sensor and use scissors to trim it by a factor of 1.6 in each dimension, you'd end up with a 10 MP APS-C sensor. Using the same lens, there should be no difference how it *resolves* before and after trimming, right?
> ...



Neuroanatomist, thank you for the reply. I believe I understand your explanation, but I think I am not making myself clear trying to communicate my point.

I agree that sensor size matters if we look at the whole image. In your example, 1D X and 7D have exactly the same number of pixels, but different pixel density. By spreading its pixels over 2.56 times larger area, 1D X is less demanding on the lens and resolves more LP for the same PH.

However, I am not trying to compare the final image in terms of FF vs crop sensors. Instead, I look at the per-unit resolution to show that a good lens should not be the limiting factor for a 22 MP FF sensor. Looking at Photozone.de APS-C tests with different lenses, there is often substantial improvement in LP / PH, going from 8 MP (350D) to 15 MP (50D). 350D with 2304 pixels per 14.8 mm height has vertical pixel density of 156 pixels / mm and 50D has 214 px / mm (3168 / 14.8 ). So, these lenses obviously do not limit the system at 156 px / mm, and can benefit from increasing the sensor density up to at least 214.

Now, 5DIII has 3840 vertical pixels per 24 mm, i.e. 160 px / mm - about the same as 350D. Doesn't that prove that another FF sensor with increased pixel density (more MP) would produce better overall resolution (LP / PH) without being limited by the lens? A FF sensor with the same pixel density as 50D would be 38 MP.

This post from Roger at Lensrentals seems to confirm my speculations. In short, it concludes that Nikon D800E with a good lens (Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 ) out-resolves the 5D III with a great lens (Canon 24-70 f/2.8 Mk II) and that the difference is bigger with the same lens (Tamron 24-70). While P-MPix, being a subjective QF, might not reflect the improvement (thank you for clarifying that), I originally wanted to make a point that a FF camera can benefit from more MP beyond 22 MP, even with the current lenses, contrary to your original claim.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/a-24-70mm-system-comparison

Of course, I understand that these are lab tests and these results may not be relevant in real shooting conditions. Also, they may be partially attributed to removing the AA filter.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Apr 15, 2013)

iKenndac said:


> Chuck Alaimo said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, all photographers are consumers - but, some consumers just buy cameras - that doesn't necessarily make them photographers. Yeah yeah yeah its a nebulous term. But, many trades are learned by apprenticing. Like plumbing - you learn from a plumber...again, just because I buy a wrench and replace a gasket that doesn't make me a plumber. Just because you buy a camera and snap a few shots, that doesn't make you a photographer. That's the point the original person was making. It's a dividing line between those who are serious and willing to learn and those that buy it cause its fancy - the latter cares about what the specs really mean, the former says that # is bigger than the other so it must be better.
> ...



+10000 --- TY, was searching for the right way to say this but skipped right over writing...


----------



## Sporgon (Apr 15, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> give Neuros camera to your nice, and make money , simple as that




Is this right ? 

Has ankorwatt submitted a post that doesn't compare a 5D mkii to a D800 ? 

Or has some of it been deleted ?


----------



## Skulker (Apr 18, 2013)

I know one thing that will defiantly be announced on the 23rd.

Ankorwatt will announce he has managed to take two pictures, one will be taken with a 5d3 and will not be very good. Just maybe the other will be taken with a d800, that one will surprise him with how good it is. :

Anyone want to take a bet against this prediction? ;D


----------



## J.R. (Apr 22, 2013)

Skulker said:


> I know one thing that will defiantly be announced on the 23rd.
> 
> Ankorwatt will announce he has managed to take two pictures, one will be taken with a 5d3 and will not be very good. Just maybe the other will be taken with a d800, that one will surprise him with how good it is. :
> 
> Anyone want to take a bet against this prediction? ;D



Pity I didn't take that bet ... Ankorwatt did just that but one day in advance-

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13980.msg260519#msg260519


----------



## jarv (Apr 22, 2013)

RocklandDragon said:


> So...any word on what's happenin' on April 23rd? Could it be the unveiling of the 70D or 7D Mark II?



I was wondering the same thing.


----------



## Shane1.4 (Apr 23, 2013)

Were there ever any press invites?


----------



## Apop (Apr 23, 2013)

im curious if anything will be announced today ( 1pm in my country)
Anyone knows what the usual time is for announcements?


----------



## Hobby Shooter (Apr 23, 2013)

It's around 6.30 on the Indochinese peninsula, the rainy season is coming our way, closer to 40 degrees outside, 104f for you guys in the promised land, no announcements as far as I've seen. Maybe I should be out taking pictures instead as I'm happy with what I got anyway.


----------



## hamada (Apr 23, 2013)

i guess ist was purley made up... CR -1


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Apr 23, 2013)

http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/no-announcement-today/


----------



## hamada (Apr 23, 2013)

they would announce a boring 70D with a boring old 18 MP sensor anyway... no 7D MK2.

but we have sigma to the rescue.

a nice lens announced, some rumored to follow...

•a 135mm f/1.8 DG OS lens (“ART” line-up)
•a 24mm f/1.4 DG lens (“ART” line-up)
•an updated 50mm f/1.4


----------



## Canon-F1 (Apr 23, 2013)

so much about what a CR2 rating is worth. :


----------



## bigal1000 (Apr 23, 2013)

ZZZZZZZZZZZZ


----------



## that1guyy (May 4, 2013)

The rumors just died.


----------



## CarlTN (May 8, 2013)

ankorwatt said:


> 18MP on APS-C looks like it is the limit of their old fab line. They have to be using that line, so they have to schedule mass market cameras there. They might put a lower volume camera on the newer line (they can't put in too much large sensor production, because it eats compact camera sensor production, which can't go on the other line.
> Canon have problems to keep up with others who have 5-7 lines for different sensors
> I would say that Canon are in trouble with a old line not modern enough to handle higher resolution with high accuracy and a new line dedicated for compact sensors but they are still buying compact sensors from Sony
> a mystery and only Canon knows how they are tackling the problem, so 18 Mp looks what we can count with for a long time, and no new ideas about raw wise ADC etc



Where are these lines located? Are you saying a "newer line" might be in a new factory, in a new location?


----------



## jrista (May 10, 2013)

Canon-F1 said:


> so much about what a CR2 rating is worth. :



Hmm...only CR3 means "just about fact". A CR2 rumor only means it was a relatively good rumor from a known source. Good rumors are still *just rumors*. A CR1 means a "take it with a big doze of salt, came from a new/unknown source" type rumor, which are *more likely* to be wrong than a CR2. Neither CR2 nor CR1 should ever be taken as "This most likely WILL happen"...that honor is only reserved for CR3.

If this had been a CR3, then we would have had to seriously question the rating system, but seeing as it was a CR2, well...it WAS A RUMOR!


----------

