Why Canon made 1Dx best specification ... II

Started May 24, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Senior MemberPosts: 1,316Gear list
Re: no need
In reply to qianp2k, May 26, 2013

qianp2k wrote:

That one is the sharpest one among all you posted in this thread.  I didn't suggest you cannot get sharp photo but just said you'd need a better technique to fully leverage 36mp potential.

That image didn't take any special technique at all - aperture priority to give me the DOF I wanted, hit the shutter and that was it...

And what's your new diversion? So now we can't use VR?   Geez, do you realize how ridiculous you come accross in your posts?

Just to get precisely accurate tests.  You cannot count on VR/IS to push to its limit everytime and hope to get lucky sharp photos everytime.

But since you seem fixated on your quest to make everyone align with your belief that high resolution DSLR's need high shutter speeds and the best glass, let's try this:

Gee, most people know that if you don't use VR/IS, a proper shutter will be = 1 / <focus_length> * pixel density (including crop factor)

What's your point, exactly?  That's a well known rule of thumb for a minimum shutter speed to offset IQ degradation due to camera shake, but it's not an absolute and there are many factors - not the least of which is how steady one cand hold their rig!

As in general. It's you to speak in absolute.  Unless you want people to believe you have a super sturdy hand or Nikon VR is so good, you will get sharp 1/10 photos everytime with 70-200 at 150mm by just P&S in one second. Good luck whatever.

I never said I could - I simply said that's what VR is designed to help you do sometimes - I never said it was foolproof - it's a tool like many others

Just one lucky shot?  How about you fire 20 shots and everytime you can get sharp photo at 1/10?  Or maybe Nikon VR is too good or maybe you have a super sturdy hands

I wouldn't expect to get 20 sharp photos with these settings, but I got it on the 1st shot, so why would I keep shooting??

maybe just 1st luck

I didn't say it wasn't - bottom line is it worked on the first shot, so why would I worry whether it would work 20 times in row

I was there to capture images, not measurebate.... and I suspect the decent results were more related to the excellent Nikon VR2 as it was windy and about 38 degrees, so I spent much of the day outside shivering as I was unfortunately not really appropriately insulated for the unforecast conditions that day.

VR2 is 4-stop right?  The new 70-200G/4.0 VR claims 5-stop VR and actually is sharper than your F2.8 VR version according to a few reviews including DXOMark.

It's not sharper at f2.8!!!  And my VR2 is sharper at f4 than it is at f2.8 and is likely sharper at f4 than the new f4 lens is, so what is your point?  Stop reading so many reviews and just enjoy your gear!

That sharpness is OK at 100% cropped level.  However just look your reduced (50%) entire photo, I don't see tack sharp either, not affected by 1/10?  I believe if you increase shutter you likely get sharper photo.

Again, you miss the point of the post whihc was to show that you coul still get good pixel level sharpness without your claimed need for extraordinary technique!

Did you ever stop to think (somehow, I suspect not) that the TC use does not make sense to you because you were not there that day and you did not bother to ask why I had it mounted?

For that particular photo, using TC doesn't make sense for 150mm FL as your 70-200 natively covers that FL w/o TC and will get sharper photo.  TC affects sharpness and other IQ more or less.

commenting before you read further - nice!

Well, I had both cameras with me and was primarliy shooting cars on the track from a distance (and was using the D800E more for video).  I had had the 300/2.8 VR2 on the D4 and the 70-200/2.8 VR2 /w1.4 TC mounted due to the distance I had just been shooting from - My bag was in my car and I walked by the garage, saw the Lotus and wanted to take a shot.  The 300mm/D4 was too long, so I used the D800E.  I was not going to stop and take a TC off, esp. since I had no place to put it and it was windy with dust flying around.  Simple as that - Now, does that make sense to you???


Also, 4 stop VR2 is the max possible - not the typical result on every shot.  1/10th at 150 mm would be 4 stops under the rule of thumb you yourself cited, so not realistic to expect VR to work perfectly.  IMHO, the result is pretty sharp for a 100% crop under these conditions - I think most reasonable people would agree with that assessment.... but there's always 1 in a crowd...

Reasonable people will not believe you will get that lucky everytime to push 4-stop VR2 to limit.  The bottom line is that you actually will get sharper photo by using faster shutter or not using TC or by both.

That's not the point - you need to learn how to comprehend what you read!

The definition of good enough is subjective.  To me for that photo I believe you could get sharper photo by using better technique - faster shutter and w/o TC as your 70-200 covers the FL and nothing prevent you stop down a bit to get sharper and better contrast photo (contrast in that photo is also not at the top).

Again, you totally ignore the point of the posted image

Like any camera (including 22/24 MP FF, or 18/24 MP APSC), getting the maximum IQ requires good technique and good glass, but that is not unique to the D800.

True, agreed.  The difference is for higher pixel density camera such as D800 it requires higher technique to fully leverage at respective potential.  That's what my point.

And my point is that in many cases (not all), the normal technique you should be using anyhow and the shutter speeds you likely are using with fast glass will mean that no extraordinary effort is requiredto get the most out of the camera - AND it will be always parity or better to a lower resolution camera when viewing/printing images at the same size as a lower resolution camera shot with the same technique (or lack thereof).  So there is only upside in that context - the downsides are around speed and file size (and slightly lower high ISO performance at the higher ISO's - somewhere above 6400.)

The real difference is that a high MP camera provides one with the potential to capture details a lower res camera can't - but, under the same conditions, the results will never be less when the final images are compared at the same size ( whether large or small)

Not disagreed but depends on my export size.  Since I only print to 20x30" or view at 1080p monitor, the difference between 22mp nd 36mp is negligible.  And I don't believe over cropping that is not replacement for longer FL lens.

Once you go north of the 300mm (and even that one is big $), longer focal length lenses are out of the reach of most (especially the new Canon super tele's) - so cropping is a viable alternative for many - basically you have an APSC crop camera built in when you need it.

But now I give up

Hope so this time but I guess you will come back again.

Nope - this is my last reply as I'd have more success having this conversation with my dog or the wall

- I've clearly shown that your mantra that you can't get good pixel level sharpness with a high MP camera without extraordinary measures is simply not true.

It's you to speak in absolute.  I said in general.  That's why I suggested you to do a scientific test by shooting each group of 20 shots between D4 and D800 at 1/10 from 70-200 at 1/200 with VR off to see which camera has average sharper per-pixel photos   Is that simple?

It's a waste of my time as I'vre already explained in another post.

You just won't accept that so I won't waste any more time trying to discuss this with someone like you - Continue with your beliefs, as you are entitled to them.  I just wanted to provide an image-based counterpoint for others to consider in forming their own opinions.

I believe you're wasting time.  No mention the samples you provided such as bird or car are not that tack sharp anyway to support your claim.  Thx to jump into this Canon forum to boast your D800. I am not impressed nevertheless

Again you miss my point - I'm not boasting about a D800 - I'm providing info to correct your misinformation on high resolution sensors.  Canon may not have one now, but I'm sure will have one in the not-so-distant future, so this info is hopefully helpful to the more rationale Canon forum readers.

Have a nice life!

 jjnik's gear list:jjnik's gear list
Nikon D4S Nikon D700 Nikon D800E Nikon 1 AW1 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +11 more
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