Why Canon made 1Dx best specification ... II

Started May 24, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 31,472
Um, Peter?
In reply to qianp2k, May 25, 2013

qianp2k wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

That's the point that you cannot.  I'd agree with you if truly everything equals.  But in reality they don't.  Canon 24-70L II is better than Nikon counterpart...

According to DxOMark, not according to PZ.  The problem with these tests, among other things, is that they test only a single copy of the lens:  http://www.slrgear.com/articles/variation_canon50f14/canon50f14.htm

Only if all those review sites said Canon 24-70L II and 70-200L II are better than Nikon counterparts.  So how coincidence?  Not sure if DXOMark uses only one copy.  How about owners' opinions?  I read several due system owners said the same that Canon copies are better.

Um, Peter?  Take a read, please:


...Canon 70-200L II is better than Nikon counterpart, Canon 24mm TS-E II is better, Canon 17mm TS-E is unique and better than 14-24 at 17mm in edges/corners clearly.

Talk about cherry-picking examples.  The 17 TSE vs the 14-24 / 2.8?  Really?

Yes.  17mm TS-E is my UWA lens while 14-24 is widely choice for Nikon UWA purpose.  17mm has much less distortion, clear better in edges/corners.

Um, duh.  How ridiculously embarrassing would it be for Canon if their latest and greatest UWA TSE lens couldn't outperform Nikon's UWA zoom?

Do you have to use a better technique such as tripod and the best lens on D800?

No.  Do you think I use a tripod with my 20 MP 6D when I came from a 13 MP 5D?

So you can see difference at 2000-pixel wide or at 13x19" print? I cannot between my 5D3 and 5D1 except former is slightly better in DR.  I don't think you can tell difference between 5D3 and D800 at 3000-4000 pixel wide or at 18x26" or even 20x30" prints.  I read several due system owners said so.  In order to print really well at 60" wide, you do need to put D800 on tripod while you have a good chance to print hand-held photos from 5D3 at 30" wide.  To see clear difference at 40" wide, I do believe you'd need put D800 on tripod or still very small if both shoot hand-held.  5D3 files can upsampling thru special software and be pretty comparable to D800 to print at 40" wide.

What makes you think the 5D3 files will look nicer by upsampling but the D800 files will not?

Please don't twist what I meant.  I mean D800 needs to use better technique such as on tripod or faster shutter in order to show its best potential otherwise the difference is smaller.

How many times have I told you that the first sentence of my first post in this thread was to say that this is true for all systems, and not unique to the D800.  Seriously -- go back and count'em.

Peter, if System A has better per-pixel quality than System B, that information, by itself, tells us nothing about the IQ of the photo.

Well if case a)  A = B in amount of pixel on the same format, then A's IQ clear better than B's.

Are we comparing systems with equal pixel counts?  No?  I didn't think so.

However if case b) A < B in amount of pixels, then the difference is smaller than case a).  Is that clear now?

No, Peter, it's not clear.  What's clear is that per-pixel measurements are irrelevant if we are interested in the IQ of the final photo.  What we compare, if we are interested in the IQ of the photo, is equal portions of the scene.

So you agreed your own acknowledgement.  What's the problem?  My point is that higher pixel amounts, better technique you needed not to export to the same size of lower MP camera, but to its own designed potential.  D800 is not designed to print to 20x30" or 4000-pixel on screen, but 40x60" print and 7000-pixel on screen.  Otherwise you wasting 36mp and better to buy a 24mp D600.

Peter, many people are better off with a good compact than a DSLR.  What's your point?

My point is that if you use D800 mostly hand-held with so-so lenses for example, then why not to get D600?

Because if I'm shooting landscapes at 24mm f/5.6, for example, then the shutter speed will usually be so high that no special care will need to be taken with the D800.  I worked the math for you before, but, alas, it appears that I have to do it again.  If you need 1/100 to get a pixel-level sharp pic with 22 MP, then you need 1/125 to do the same with 36 MP.  How often is that a problem, Peter?

What's point if per-pixel D800 photos look soft and mushy and print not that good at 40x60" with inferior technique, so you print 20x30" and only show at 4000-pixel wide instead?

That's a strawman argument, which only accomplishes yet another display of your ignorance.  As I've also told you more times than I can count, if 40x60 inches looks bad with 36 MP, it will look worse still with 22 MP.  If 20x30 inches looks good with 22 MP, it will look better with 36 MP.

So what's with your bogus strawman arguments rather than simply accepting such an intuitively simple fact?

Again, I refer you to the FF photographers going mFT for the exact same reasons (with the added bonus of a significantly smaller kit).

That is another topic.  Crop format has much bigger impact on IQ than amount of pixels difference.  The difference between 5D2/5D3 and mFT is much bigger than between 5d3/5D2 and D800.



No idea, no opinion how OP did the test.

Not surprising, since it was only spelled out in the link I gave.

Yes but just on different degree.  As I said, with hand-held you can get pretty sharp full size 5D3 files and excellent print quality to 20x30".  With D800, you don't get the same level of full size D800 files and similar print quality at 40x60".

So what it boils down to is that you're saying the 36 MP of the D800 is a waste since photos at 40x60 inches don't have the same IQ as photos from the 5D3 at 20x30 inches?

Sigh.  You love to cut my words out of meaning and twist what I actually meant.  I never said and meant by exact words you described.  I simply mean D800 does need better techniques such as on tripod or faster shutter, or best lenses in order to print big such as 40x60".

And what you ignore is that many landscape photographers use a tripod regardless and that there is usually sufficient light to get more than a fast enough shutter speed regardless.

In fact, you *actively* ingore those simple facts.  Whether it's due to ignorance or dishonesty, I cannot comment.

5D3 will be more forgivable to have similar print quality at 20x30".

No, it will not.  All else equal, 36 MP will *always* record at least as much detail as 22 MP.

My, my.  It's not education that you need, but...

yeah, please read what I meant as a whole.

I have, and it just gets more and more disappointing each time to see you either not getting the simplest of concepts or...

I don't deny D800 resolution advantage but only suggested as DPR review also said, that it demands higher technique to fully leverage its 36mp.

As I've said multiple times (please go back and count), there are many non-trivial situations where no special care is needed to take advantage of the full potential of 36 MP over 24 MP.  For example, a landscape taken with Sigma 35 / 1.4 at f/5.6 1/200.

More to the point, for someone like me, who shoots ultra shallow DOFs all the time even in good light, the higher pixel count will render more detail on the portions of the scene within the DOF, with shutter speed to spare in good light, such as for pics like these:


Now, before you ask again why I didn't get the D800 instead of the 6D, I implore you to go find where I already answered that for you, as you are in the habit of not remembering what I have said.

P.S:  How embarrassing is this post of yours?


Look a bit further up in that thread to see why.  That said, the "reveal" also presents a conundrum for me as well.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow