Slatan

Slatan

Joined on Oct 3, 2011

Comments

Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6
On Canon EOS 5D Mark III studio samples published article (287 comments in total)
In reply to:

Lu Heng: this is funny how many people are concern about pixels, high ISO etc., making a war between canon, nikon, sony.. name it. as if it is a substitute of actual photography. as if the one and only available light is a candlelight and they "desperately must" print huge billboards from every shot they take.
supposed to be that way?
boring.

forget the flexibility, get a 200mm f/2.8L (cheap and great) or a 300mm f/2.8L IS and continue shooting with your 5d2. I believe it would be a MUCH better investment.
In my view, neither 5D3 nor D800 are worth it.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 28, 2012 at 23:41 UTC

I believe the vast majority of posters here are not payed for their photography. A professional would think this 5d3 / d800 matter very objective: how much more money will I make using this new camera? Do some math and if it's worthwhile, buy it. If not (MOST LIKELY!!!), just move on until new gear is really needed.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 26, 2012 at 07:50 UTC as 16th comment | 2 replies
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Slatan: Do this: select RAW, iso 800, and click on the date on the blue clock where it says 15. Now, if you can't see the ugly blotchy jpeg-like artifacts on the d800 image, you need to see the medic. In fact, do something more: select iso 1600 just for the 5d2 and compare with the d800 iso 800 in the same blue clock zone. It will be about the same, so there you have it: 5d2 is one stop better, approximately.

You can also look into the pink - magenta zone, color chart, upper right.
D800 has good details indeed, but it trails the 5d2 in terms of high iso performance, now imagine comparing it with the 5d mark iii - there's no contest here.

Anyone who says D800 is better in noise performance in the following screenshot is a loonie:
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/401/d800iso1600.jpg/

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 23:48 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)
In reply to:

Slatan: Do this: select RAW, iso 800, and click on the date on the blue clock where it says 15. Now, if you can't see the ugly blotchy jpeg-like artifacts on the d800 image, you need to see the medic. In fact, do something more: select iso 1600 just for the 5d2 and compare with the d800 iso 800 in the same blue clock zone. It will be about the same, so there you have it: 5d2 is one stop better, approximately.

You can also look into the pink - magenta zone, color chart, upper right.
D800 has good details indeed, but it trails the 5d2 in terms of high iso performance, now imagine comparing it with the 5d mark iii - there's no contest here.

why would you compare BOTH at d800 resolution? Upsize the 5d2 or what? It makes absolutely no sense. For 36 MP, the D800 is CLEARLY noisier than 5D2. Of course you can downsize them both to 8 MP or whatever but that's not the point, is it? Nikon is selling you a noisier 36 MP camera, that's all.
I'm not a fanboy, I own both systems - a D700, 5D2 and 7D with a plethora of lenses.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 21:34 UTC
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)

Do this: select RAW, iso 800, and click on the date on the blue clock where it says 15. Now, if you can't see the ugly blotchy jpeg-like artifacts on the d800 image, you need to see the medic. In fact, do something more: select iso 1600 just for the 5d2 and compare with the d800 iso 800 in the same blue clock zone. It will be about the same, so there you have it: 5d2 is one stop better, approximately.

You can also look into the pink - magenta zone, color chart, upper right.
D800 has good details indeed, but it trails the 5d2 in terms of high iso performance, now imagine comparing it with the 5d mark iii - there's no contest here.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 20:59 UTC as 36th comment | 6 replies
On Nikon D800 preview (1118 comments in total)

So, in short - high iso images look much worse than on 5D2 and low iso images look like an upsized 5D2, no real advantage.

Direct link | Posted on Mar 20, 2012 at 06:53 UTC as 78th comment | 3 replies
Total: 6, showing: 1 – 6