# Canon is on top again!



## poias (Oct 17, 2012)

With the EOS 1Dx, Canon has the best AF (after the f/8 focusing and black focus point fix), best frame rates, best low light ever, and of course the best pro sensor according to the rumored DxO leaks. 

And it sucks for those using lower tiered Canon products with older sensor tech, but Canon's flagship has certainly been crowned the undisputed king of pro bodies. Hopefully now the lower tiered products get the same superior sensor in the future. May be 6D is that breed of new superior sensors coming out. Watch out sonikon, Canon is back with a vengeance!


----------



## Fishnose (Oct 17, 2012)

What's your point exactly? 
Yes, the 1Dx is a bloody marvellous camera, we all know that. Well established fact. And the other Canons are trailing the Nikons badly (we're talking sensors here). Also well established fact.

Sony and Nikon are leading the way and will for a while I suspect. Why is the broad range of Canon DSLRs suddenly 'back with a vengeance' just because the1Dx is great?


----------



## Drizzt321 (Oct 17, 2012)

I actually just had a conversation with another photographer a couple of days ago about Canon sensors trailing Nikons. He made the point that (coming from a film background), he felt that the Canon sensors (specifically talking about the 5Dc, 5d3) that he felt they gave a more film like quality in terms of colors and representation as opposed to Nikon (really Sony) sensors which was much more flat. He also made the point that certain things which may contribute to that look is baked into the chip & low level functionality such as the ADC's, initial hardware/software readouts, etc which would be potentially difficult to duplicate through post processing.

Just an interesting observation from someone else. I, personally, haven't looked at enough Nikon vs Canon photos in detail to see a difference, and I'm not coming from a film background.


----------



## nightbreath (Oct 17, 2012)

Still searching for our personal style, but I'm glad we're using Canon:







I'm not sure, what Nikon/Sony can offer (not able to try the RAWs), but I have a feeling that there are differences between Canon and others' RAWs. Unless someone can argue?


----------



## TheSuede (Oct 17, 2012)

Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?
Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?
Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?


----------



## nightbreath (Oct 17, 2012)

I thought it is clear that almost everyone edits his photos. Sorry for not pointing that out 
So I was referring to the result, that can be achieved only with a proper RAW file... as I suppose ???


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 17, 2012)

TheSuede said:


> Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?
> Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?
> Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?



Did the words 'personal style' escape you?
Are you unaware of the fact that photography is art?
Did you really mean to offer OFFENSIVE criticism?

:


----------



## Razor2012 (Oct 17, 2012)

Fishnose said:


> What's your point exactly?
> Yes, the 1Dx is a bloody marvellous camera, we all know that. Well established fact. And the other Canons are trailing the Nikons badly (we're talking sensors here). Also well established fact.
> 
> Sony and Nikon are leading the way and will for a while I suspect. Why is the broad range of Canon DSLRs suddenly 'back with a vengeance' just because the1Dx is great?



Does he really need a point, what's so bad about talking about a great camera? We need alot more positive chat here considering all the negative. I would sooner have great AF, ISO and FPS rather than high MP. Not to mention great glass.


----------



## EOBeav (Oct 17, 2012)

Dang, now I'm going to have to get rid of that POS 5DmkII I got last Christmas.


----------



## nightbreath (Oct 17, 2012)

EOBeav said:


> Dang, now I'm going to have to get rid of that POS 5DmkII I got last Christmas.


Why? It's a wonderful camera


----------



## unfocused (Oct 17, 2012)

TheSuede said:


> Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?
> Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?
> Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?



Were you dropped on the head as a baby?
Did your parents never teach you any manners?
Are you just a jerk?



nightbreath said:


> Still searching for our personal style, but I'm glad we're using Canon:



Nightbreath, two questions:

What *are* those things in the background? A giant horse and some sort of Tiki Head? They are certainly the Punctum in that picture (obscure reference to Camera Lucida). 

Seriously, I've looked at your website before. Very impressive. Just curious, are you in Russia? Ukraine? someone else in the former Soviet Union?


----------



## pwp (Oct 17, 2012)

poias said:


> Canon is back with a vengeance!



Umm, where did they go? Maybe momentarily out to lunch with the early build 1D3, but hey....
Agreed, the 1DX is the current gold standard in the DSLR universe.

-PW


----------



## EOBeav (Oct 17, 2012)

nightbreath said:


> EOBeav said:
> 
> 
> > Dang, now I'm going to have to get rid of that POS 5DmkII I got last Christmas.
> ...



Well, according to the OP, it's a lower tiered Canon product that I should be ashamed to own.


----------



## jrista (Oct 17, 2012)

TheSuede said:


> Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?
> Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?
> Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?



Do you really think we should take you seriously when you come off so rude?

Oh...and did you hear...photography is an ART. We can all take license.


----------



## jrista (Oct 18, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> Drizzt321 said:
> 
> 
> > I actually just had a conversation with another photographer a couple of days ago about Canon sensors trailing Nikons. He made the point that (coming from a film background), he felt that the Canon sensors (specifically talking about the 5Dc, 5d3) that he felt they gave a more film like quality in terms of colors and representation as opposed to Nikon (really Sony) sensors which was much more flat. He also made the point that certain things which may contribute to that look is baked into the chip & low level functionality such as the ADC's, initial hardware/software readouts, etc which would be potentially difficult to duplicate through post processing.
> ...



Sure he does. Every device, be it film or yes, even an electronic sensor or an ADC, has a natural response curve that will affect color reproduction. I don't believe the argument was that it was "impossible" to replicate via post processing...just that it would be _*difficult*_ to replicate...which is indeed true. If one really wanted to invest the time (and it would be a LOT of time), they could probably create a camera profile that tweaked the the tone curves for each channel to produce color more reminiscent of their favorite film with any camera's RAW...but that would be a LOT of work, and that person would really need to understand film response like the back of their hand. (I love the look of drum scans of 4x5 Velvia 50 slide film...some of the best natural warm color I've ever seen. I've spent a LOT of time trying to replicate it in my own photos taken with Canon DSLR's using curves in Photoshop. I finally stopped bothering after countless hours because the task was nearly impossible, even though I had good reference information regarding Velvia 50's natural response curves and dozens of sample photos to work with.) 

There are even members of this forum who will only use certain lines of Canon cameras because they prefer the natural color strait out of the camera better than what they get from a different model, even though it would still be a Canon model.


----------



## TheSuede (Oct 18, 2012)

Well, if my commend caused offense, then I have to:
1) apologize
2) question the relevance of the "sample picture".

Obviously the camera didn't record the scene that way, the colors in the image are undoubtedly a result of fairly strong post-processing - and this is why I question what relevance it has to the original threadstarter's question.

If you say that a certain camera has "better colors" than another camera - would you really say that a reasonable proof-in-point would be to look at a single, heavily processed shot?
Wouldn't the ONLY reasonable way to compare it be to have two samples from two different cameras, with as little processing as possible - and see which you prefer?

And this is definitely not meant as an insult (or even as criticism!) to the poster of the image. But "better" color? That would have to answered by an art critic in this case - not by someone interested in "good" or "accurate" color.

If you want to discuss color, you have to have references - something to compare to.


----------



## TheSuede (Oct 18, 2012)

A serious reply to the threadstarter would be:

Yes, the Canon cameras are indeed quite different in their basal behavior. Their newer models - since the 50D and forwards - all share a common trait.
What really should be a "red" color filter on the sensor is a lot more like "orange-red" in a Canon camera. This has both pros and cons.

Pros:

The camera is less sensitive to shifts in light spectral composition - people don't turn as "greenish yellow" under fluorescent lights as with cameras with better hue resolution
The skintones, which are mainly yellow-orange-red in base hues shift less in luma (you get "smoother" skin color)
Having less hue resolution in the green - deep red region does also help with having a smooth, natural luma contrast in that range
Cons:

The camera will have trouble discerning between deep orange and strong reds
The skintones, which are mainly yellow-orange-red in base hues are more affected by noise at higher ISOs, since the base color correction matrix has to work harder with Canon filters (higher negative coefficients)
Greenery will show less hue-resolution, and less luma contrast. The camera will have more trouble discerning between two similar (but not identical) green colors.
As ISOs rise, the effect the higher strength color correction needed to get "normal" color out from the raw file increases chroma noise by about the square of the correction sstrength difference - hence the strong magenta-green chroma noise in a non-noise-reduced Canon high-ISO raw file.

Now, if the points are really pros or cons will be up to each for him- or herself to decide. For some a pro might move to the con, and vice verse.

Some (quite a lot of people - in my experience) do also prefer the original 5D (and 10-40D) color to the newer model colors. The original 5D, and in part also the 1Ds mkIII have a much higher green-yellow-orange band hue resolution, and they also render greenery and nature photography quite differently. Better? Some think so, some don't.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 18, 2012)

TheSuede said:


> Obviously the camera didn't record the scene that way, the colors in the image are undoubtedly a result of fairly strong post-processing - and this is why I question what relevance it has to the original threadstarter's question.
> 
> *If you say that a certain camera has "better colors" than another camera... *



BUT...nightbreath didn't say that. He just posted a picture, and said he likes shooting with Canon...and was pounced upon with rudeness. That's the sort of thing that pretty clearly says, "I am a forum troll." 

But then again, trolls do not generally apologize, which is appreciated. So, let's move on...


----------



## pierceography (Oct 18, 2012)

TheSuede said:


> Well, if my commend caused offense, then I have to:
> 1) apologize
> 2) question the relevance of the "sample picture".
> 
> ...



The relevance of the sample picture is that cameras are more than sensors and pixels, they're tools we use to create art -- which is highly personal and subjective. Your comments were, at best, ignorant and unnecessary to the subject of this thread. But trolls gonna troll.

Frankly, I like the shot. Sure, the colors were a bit cooler than I would have used myself. But a lot of wedding photos are almost pushed too warm. So seeing the cooler colors was a nice touch and welcome change of pace. Nicely done!


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 18, 2012)

TheSuede said:


> Did the bride really wear a cyan green dress?
> Did the clouds really break from clear blue (sky) to green (gray cloud) to bright magenta (cloud highlights)?
> Do you mean we should take this as an example of GOOD color?



Nothing bad for his style. Filters of old exists for a reason. To apply it via digital effects, I think there's no problem with that as long as he's able to get the mood that he wants to picture.


----------



## pierceography (Oct 18, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> cooler colors? they have a blue /cyan hue all over, blue asphalt, blue horse, etc. I thought it was an expression of artistry, we can take color theory in another thread if anyone are interested, from screen to print



Wow, ok... I guess we're gonna get granular here. The couple (i.e. the focal point) have a more blue(ish) hue (sorry, I guess I can't use color temperature when describing colors), which as I felt gave a more unique artistic look to the scene.

Lotta jerks in this thread, huh? In that case: lol no ur dumb. Boom.


----------



## V8Beast (Oct 18, 2012)

Drizzt321 said:


> I actually just had a conversation with another photographer a couple of days ago about Canon sensors trailing Nikons. He made the point that (coming from a film background), he felt that the Canon sensors (specifically talking about the 5Dc, 5d3) that he felt they gave a more film like quality in terms of colors and representation as opposed to Nikon (really Sony) sensors which was much more flat.



Many people, myself included, that come from a film background share this sentiment as well. I'm not saying that Canon's color reproduction is superior to Nikon's, but a raw Canon file requires less work in post to tweak the colors to my liking. It's simply a matter of personal preference. 

I never knew why Canon's sensors rendered colors the way they did, but this assessment is spot on:



TheSuede said:


> A serious reply to the threadstarter would be:
> 
> Yes, the Canon cameras are indeed quite different in their basal behavior. Their newer models - since the 50D and forwards - all share a common trait.
> What really should be a "red" color filter on the sensor is a lot more like "orange-red" in a Canon camera. This has both pros and cons.
> ...



The only thing I'd add to this is that even pre-50D era bodies shared similar characteristics you described. And while I love my 5D3, the old 5DC's files certainly have a unique look to them. Too bad it's such a pain to use!


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 18, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Mikael Risedal said:
> ...



Sounds to me like the "measurebeators" and the "pixel peepers" that Ken and Michael are talking about.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Oct 18, 2012)

nightbreath said:


> Still searching for our personal style, but I'm glad we're using Canon:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What is that big blue thing in the background, is that boat under a blue tarp, an art piece? What is that??


----------



## serendipidy (Oct 18, 2012)

Background objects look to me like a giant blue statue head lying on it's side (sorta ancient Greek or Troy looking; did they have the Blue Men Group back then?) and a horse statue. Nightbreath, where was this taken? I like your artistic interpretation and composition.


----------



## Aglet (Oct 18, 2012)

TheSuede said:


> Some (quite a lot of people - in my experience) do also prefer the original 5D (and 10-40D) color to the newer model colors. The original 5D, and in part also the 1Ds mkIII have a much higher green-yellow-orange band hue resolution, and they also render greenery and nature photography quite differently. Better? Some think so, some don't.



Yes, I keep my old 40D around for portraits and some other shots and even the old 350D has that "certain something" when it comes to the look of the final image that I prefer over the look I get from 60D, 7D and even 5D2.
It's very subtle but it's perceptible.

As for Canon on top again...
A hearty, "Ha!"


----------



## nightbreath (Oct 18, 2012)

I'm pleased someone liked the style of the photo  Tonal range and initial colors from the sensor definitely helped in achieving the needed result. We need to bring the same feeling throughout all the photos from the wedding day, so some of those look slightly overprocessed.

This is a Spanish-Ukrainian wedding that took place in Ukraine. We've met with the couple in this hotel complex called Bartolomeo (in honor of geographical discoveries and Bartolomeo Diaz). The horse and big face statues were added to create the mood of the legend that stands behind the hotel name


----------



## nightbreath (Oct 18, 2012)

Thank you!  There was a moment when my wife figured out that our audience aren't people that look at the photos and say "oh, that's a creative view on things". People we do the photos for are shown on them. So our aim is to appeal to our customers, show their feelings and do that from an angle they didn't look under.

The web-site portfolio is not updated for a while, because we are out of free time now, but I hope in the nearest months we'll be able to show even better results than we have now 






P.S. Sorry for off-topic


----------



## jrista (Oct 18, 2012)

nightbreath said:


> Thank you!  There was a moment when my wife figured out that our audience aren't people that look at the photos and say "oh, that's a creative view on things". People we do the photos for are shown on them. So our aim is to appeal to our customers, show their feelings and do that from an angle they didn't look under.
> 
> The web-site portfolio is not updated for a while, because we are out of free time now, but I hope in the nearest months we'll be able to show even better results than we have now
> 
> ...



Sorry for continuing the off-topic...but WOW, that groom is SHORT!!


----------



## nightbreath (Oct 18, 2012)

jrista said:


> Sorry for continuing the off-topic...but WOW, that groom is SHORT!!


He was well-educated, emotional and interesting to shoot. So it's not that important (especially taking into consideration the heels bride was on).

The challenge is to shoot people that are by 30-40% different in size. But there is some kind of comic cuteness in this kind of photos too


----------



## nexus (Oct 18, 2012)

@bightbreath - I saw your site... just by curiosity what you're shooting with ? 5d III? and may i ask what flashes (light modifiers)? 
I like the look of your compositions...


----------



## jrista (Oct 18, 2012)

nightbreath said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry for continuing the off-topic...but WOW, that groom is SHORT!!
> ...



Totally agree, it is a great photo! The bride is taking a fairly large step, too, which probably negates a lot more than the couple inches she's getting from her heals. Anyway, that was the primary observation I got on the subjects out of the photo...short groom!  From what I see on your web site, your work is excellent. Very creative.


----------



## nightbreath (Oct 18, 2012)

nexus said:


> @bightbreath - I saw your site... just by curiosity what you're shooting with ? 5d III? and may i ask what flashes (light modifiers)?
> I like the look of your compositions...


It's 5D Mark II  We use all available light sources (natural light, natural reflectors, normal reflectors, flashes on top of the camera, off-camera flashes, umbrellas, soft-boxes) depending on light conditions


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 19, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> nightbreath said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



Ok. Can you show us some very good samples of your work also? It would be really interesting to see your work of art and that of other professionals here.


----------



## jrista (Oct 19, 2012)

verysimplejason said:


> Mikael Risedal said:
> 
> 
> > nightbreath said:
> ...



Hmm. This will be interesting. I'm betting on junky comparison images taken with the 5D II, possibly the 7D and a variety of Exmore-inside DSLR's...mostly from Nikon. I'll also predict *uberstops* (yes, technical term) of unrealistic shadow lifting in unrealistic scenarios. 8)


----------



## sandymandy (Oct 19, 2012)

I dont like the cyan cast. Looks so unnatural to me.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 19, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> I have told nightbreath that I like his pictures and now when I describe that he's last ones (with blue/cyan cast) looks like a result I got many years ago with the first film scanner - many of you think it was a negative response.
> keep things separate please.



No negative response for me. I just want to see your work. Is it bad to see any photos from you? If I ask Neuro for example, he'll readily show it to me. I admit, I'm not a professional and I'm always craving to see professional's work. Maybe I can derive some inspiration from you.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 19, 2012)

sandymandy said:


> I dont like the cyan cast. Looks so unnatural to me.



I agree with you but it really depends on personal style and how do you want to convey your work. I think he did it to emphasize the mood though of course, this is just my opinion.


----------



## Fishnose (Oct 21, 2012)

Great pictures, Mikael.

Fascinating, isn't it - everybody puked on you and demanded pro images, apparently not expecting any. 
And when you produce, they all shut up and dissolve into the woodwork lol....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 21, 2012)

Fascinating, isn't it - people get bored with trolling comments, responses wane, and it's misinterpreted. :


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 22, 2012)

Thanks Mikael. My point is, You don't actually need that "fabulous" camera in order to take these pictures. Right? Canon admittedly doesn't have a DR that is up to recent Nikon's (or Sony's) technology. But so what? Any camera as long as you know its limitations can take good pictures. Are you convincing us to buy Nikon instead? For most of us, it doesn't matter. I like Canon's button arrangement and access to other functionality better than Nikon. For some reason, I also happen to like Canon's lenses better than Nikon except the 18-55mm.  That can be reason enough to buy Canon. For some it's not. Of course, if somebody just give me a Nikon D800 for example, I will accept it wholeheartedly but without lenses, I'll gladly exchange it with a 5D2 + lenses or a 5D3. I think that reflects what most fellow photographers here are feeling. Only a few here that are already well invested in a system will think of DR or ISO or MP as their most singular reason to switch systems. If you're a new user then the decision will change a lot but saying that, there are still other things beyond the sensor to consider.


----------



## Fishnose (Oct 22, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Fascinating, isn't it - people get bored with trolling comments, responses wane, and it's misinterpreted. :



LOL, Mikael is hardly a troll. Slightly abrasive maybe. 
If that's your definition of a troll you haven't spent much time on the web.


----------



## nicku (Oct 22, 2012)

poias said:


> With the EOS 1Dx, Canon has the best AF (after the f/8 focusing and black focus point fix), best frame rates, best low light ever, and of course the best pro sensor according to the rumored DxO leaks.
> 
> And it sucks for those using lower tiered Canon products with older sensor tech, but Canon's flagship has certainly been crowned the undisputed king of pro bodies. Hopefully now the lower tiered products get the same superior sensor in the future. May be 6D is that breed of new superior sensors coming out. Watch out sonikon, Canon is back with a vengeance!



looooool.... yes Canon 1Dx is better in terms of features packed in the camera ( like frame rate, AF, etc...) but is not better than Nikon ( D4) in high ISO performance...

Regarding the lower pro bodies like D800 vs 5D3 and D600 vs 6D ( witch is a joke) Nikon definitely wins ( from my business point of view).

If Canon release the Megapixel monster in a 1D body at a astronomic price (over 1Dx).... than definitely my next camera will be the king of all around FF.... Nikon D800.


----------



## dslr-preview (Oct 22, 2012)

? What to celebrate?

For many the 1dx is financially out of reach
Canon dared to release once the 5DMII with the very old AF system of the 5 D meaning from R&D process point of view it took nearly a decade to come up with something better for the 5D series !!!

But what is the better now:

- canon dares again to come up with a sensor on the 5DMIII, wich is marginally better compared to the old model 5DMII
- the AF system misses out a capability already being available on the Nikon 700 e.g. , namely the tracking system making sure you won't loose the phocus on many shots of movement
- thus even if one or the other shot may succeed , you can never be sure and once the 5D III gets the focus wrong in AI SERVO it takes many frames to be in focus again or not at all 
- the metering system is not working nicely too - see dpreview comparison 1d MiV vs 5D MIII

- HDR modus ??? who needs that in professional workflows where CS versions have nice HDR modules
- double exposer, Jesus we did that in analogue times on cams costing as much as 300 Euro

Thus the camera most important for many of us, the new 5D III is nothing else but a model stripped down in the essentials - the last 5D : no good AF , this 5D : no real sensor improvement , no credible movement AF, still incredible long times in Life-View.... 

Meanwhile we have from competitors other data:
- Sony coming up in the A99 with the 24 MB sensor also used in Nikon 600 - according to DXO optics on the level of a Phase One middle format - noise.... where
- Fuji 1xpro, the APSC sensor delivers even on 6400 photos as cristal sharp and noiseless as a NIKON D4 
- Sony delivering cameras with semi-permanent mirror, thus 10 pix / sec , obviously much more effortless
- Sony delivers a permanent live view which focusses fast

So maybe in the one or other report Canon got credits for the 1DX, but besides of that innovation is meanwhile found in other places and the marketing strategy of Canon plays for sure not into the pockets of their clients ...thus one could regret to have once started with that system







poias said:


> With the EOS 1Dx, Canon has the best AF (after the f/8 focusing and black focus point fix), best frame rates, best low light ever, and of course the best pro sensor according to the rumored DxO leaks.
> 
> And it sucks for those using lower tiered Canon products with older sensor tech, but Canon's flagship has certainly been crowned the undisputed king of pro bodies. Hopefully now the lower tiered products get the same superior sensor in the future. May be 6D is that breed of new superior sensors coming out. Watch out sonikon, Canon is back with a vengeance!


----------



## nicku (Oct 22, 2012)

dslr-preview said:


> ? What to celebrate?
> 
> For many the 1dx is financially out of reach
> Canon dared to release once the 5DMII with the very old AF system of the 5 D meaning from R&D process point of view it took nearly a decade to come up with something better for the 5D series !!!
> ...



As a 10 years Canon user.....unfortunately i must agree with you.

Canon has and still have the best quality lenses .... but the bodies are under competition ( with the exception of 1Dx)


----------



## K-amps (Oct 22, 2012)

That graph looks more like a middle aged man's lack of erectile function plotted over time on the X axis .... Looks like the 1Dx enjoys one blip of "action" before he dies...


----------



## Razor2012 (Oct 22, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> With the EOS 1Dx, Canon has the best AF (after the f/8 focusing and black focus point fix), best frame rates, best low light ever, and of course the best pro sensor according to the rumored DxO leaks.
> 
> 
> well , I think you'll be surprised, that rumors is planted
> B.Claff has estimated the 1dx figures , and he has done that many times with other cameras/sensors and been right every time



If we are going to use DxO figures then we should use them all the time for every camera, not just when it's convenient.


----------



## pierceography (Oct 22, 2012)

Fishnose said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Fascinating, isn't it - people get bored with trolling comments, responses wane, and it's misinterpreted. :
> ...



Or perhaps you haven't spent enough time reading Mikael's comments in other threads in this forum.

According to Mikael, sensor performance is everything and we should disregard all other aspects of photography.

But beating dead horses with shallow and stubborn subjectiveness definitely isn't the trait of a troll. Oh wait...


----------



## Razor2012 (Oct 22, 2012)

pierceography said:


> Fishnose said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



It's one thing to make a point and to bring some good facts to the table, but to keep on flooding the forum with negativity is a bit much...leave that dead horse alone already.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 22, 2012)

*troll* /trōl/ (noun) someone who posts inflammatory messages in an online forum with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

*not a troll* /nät ā trōl/ (noun) someone who posts inflammatory messages in an online forum with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, but I happen to agree with the messages/posts.


----------



## pierceography (Oct 22, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> pierceography said:
> 
> 
> > Fishnose said:
> ...



Well, I'm sure you'll tell me another 20 times in one thread. So maybe I'll get it by then. Or (more likely) I already get it, and don't care for your "here's my opinion, agree with me or else" flood tactics.


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 22, 2012)

poias said:


> With the EOS 1Dx, Canon has the best AF (after the f/8 focusing and black focus point fix), best frame rates, best low light ever, and of course the best pro sensor according to the rumored DxO leaks.
> 
> And it sucks for those using lower tiered Canon products with older sensor tech, but Canon's flagship has certainly been crowned the undisputed king of pro bodies. Hopefully now the lower tiered products get the same superior sensor in the future. May be 6D is that breed of new superior sensors coming out. Watch out sonikon, Canon is back with a vengeance!



It is the best Pro camera ever made so far. Its a shame that I'll never own/use/need a 1D series camera. Perhaps a New 1Ds series camera might sway me.


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 22, 2012)

Now your getting the idea. ;D


----------



## K-amps (Oct 22, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> *troll* /trōl/ (noun) someone who posts inflammatory messages in an online forum with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
> 
> *not a troll* /nät ā trōl/ (noun) someone who posts inflammatory messages in an online forum with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, but I happen to agree with the messages/posts.



Brilliant !! ;D


----------



## jrista (Oct 22, 2012)

K-amps said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > *troll* /trōl/ (noun) someone who posts inflammatory messages in an online forum with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
> ...



Wow, I think you actually started a technical debate about the merits of being a troll, what powers trolls have, and what kinds of materials and magic can stop trolls....how ironic is THAT!! ;D


----------



## well_dunno (Oct 22, 2012)

On a separate note, according to wikipedia, _Social competence is a complex, multidimensional concept consisting of social, emotional (e.g., affect regulation), cognitive (e.g., fund of information, skills for processing/acquisition, perspective taking), and behavioral (e.g., conversation skills, prosocial behavior) skills, as well as motivational and expectancy sets (e.g., moral development, self-efficacy) needed for successful social adaptation._ 

Perhaps suggesting other forum members are ignorant or in denial or they do not understand things is not the best way to have a decent conversation?


----------



## pierceography (Oct 23, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> I called it open minded, and not rigid and denialing
> and some Troll descriptions fits better into a denialing fan boy
> 
> because they can not, for example cross furrows in a field but must go along.
> or that a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence



Ok, seriously Mikael... you're getting annoying. Neuro has pointed out numerous times that most in this forum have accepted the fact that Nikon sensors out perform Canon sensors. I'm including myself in this.

So bearing that in mind, what exactly are we in denial about? Sounds to me like you're simply bitter and want company in your anguish over your opinions on Canon vs Nikon. Sorry, pal... Nikon sensor performance aside, there are MANY other reasons why I love Canon and will continue to stick with them.

And call me or anyone else that doesn't share your pessimism a fanboy all you want... but a least I'm realistic and keep an open mind.

Too bad this isn't IRC... a nice /kb would certainly be in order.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 23, 2012)

Mikael Risedal said:


> verysimplejason said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Mikael. My point is, You don't actually need that "fabulous" camera in order to take these pictures. Right? Canon admittedly doesn't have a DR that is up to recent Nikon's (or Sony's) technology. But so what? Any camera as long as you know its limitations can take good pictures. Are you convincing us to buy Nikon instead? For most of us, it doesn't matter. I like Canon's button arrangement and access to other functionality better than Nikon. For some reason, I also happen to like Canon's lenses better than Nikon except the 18-55mm.  That can be reason enough to buy Canon. For some it's not. Of course, if somebody just give me a Nikon D800 for example, I will accept it wholeheartedly but without lenses, I'll gladly exchange it with a 5D2 + lenses or a 5D3. I think that reflects what most fellow photographers here are feeling. Only a few here that are already well invested in a system will think of DR or ISO or MP as their most singular reason to switch systems. If you're a new user then the decision will change a lot but saying that, there are still other things beyond the sensor to consider.
> ...



Look, I understand what you are saying. Yup, HDR is very useful for IQ, shooting headroom, etc, but you should also understand that it's not the only thing that photographers will be looking for in a camera body. I've already given some of the important points to consider in a camera body and yet you still would want to highlight DR. I think that's why a lot of forumers here are resenting your comments. It's already accepted that HDR is important, (very important) but there are other considerations in a camera body. Please don't beat a dead horse more than once. If you really want Nikon or Sony because of their outstanding sensor then it's alright. Nobody will tell you it's wrong. But for most of us, there are other reasons why we're using Canon even if it does not perform better in its DR against Nikon and Sony. I hope my mentioning the importance of DR is enough.


----------



## nicku (Oct 23, 2012)

I have read careful the thread... in the last page many people are discussing about the 1Dx performance; Yes, 1Dx is a very, very good camera... but i believe 90% of the forum readers consider the Canon flagship out of their reach or too expensive for their needs (including me).

I use the DSLR in light controlled situations , 95% under ISO 320, In studio, commercial, portraits and stock photography. In my work field size matters ( I mean MP )... high ISO performance , frame rate are not so important. What should i choose ?? 5D3 or D800?...

I believe Nikon answer to the majority of my needs. 

If canon release the MP monster in 1D body ; than certainly the price tag will be around $9000. In this case what will stop many pros for getting a Pentax 645d Medium format instead of a Canon FF with same resolution?? The IQ will be incomparably.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 23, 2012)

nicku said:


> I have read careful the thread... in the last page many people are discussing about the 1Dx performance; Yes, 1Dx is a very, very good camera... but i believe 90% of the forum readers consider the Canon flagship out of their reach or too expensive for their needs (including me).
> 
> I use the DSLR in light controlled situations , 95% under ISO 320, In studio, commercial, portraits and stock photography. In my work field size matters ( I mean MP )... high ISO performance , frame rate are not so important. What should i choose ?? 5D3 or D800?...
> 
> ...



If you really believe Nikon D800 is the right tool for you then go ahead. It will be a great tool for you. You just have to ask yourself always, "Is it worth it?" (price, system cost of switching, overall camera comfort of use, build, reliability, etc...). If it's worth it, no statistics or tests should stop you from buying one though I'd say priorities in life always keeps me from buying what I want.  It really doesn't matter what tool you used to capture that "moment" or picture you're after. What's important always is your end result. Don't be a pixel peeper like some here. Sometimes, I'm also prone to thinking that way but I try as much as possible to be a real artist which all photographers ideally should be.


----------

