kryten61: Alternatively , I wonder if Sebastiao Salgado realises his award winning work is shot on a sensor that is not quite state of the art. Maybe if he know he would rush back to all those recent locations and take much better images. :-)I wonder if he cares?
Canon need to improve from a Pixel peeping point of view, or do they? Of course improvement is welcomed but needs perspective.I know many working photographers who have no idea what is being discussed in here, who are oblivious to any of this PP. It doesn't seem to be quite as big an issue to them and or they are more than happy with their gear, lenses , performance etc offered by their systems. And I suppose more importantly so are their Clients.
I wonder if clients will start demanding a Nikon or Sony shooter because of their much better images?????…I think not. :-)
Great photographers can and do use any system and get great results. However, when I'm spending a huge amount of my disposable cash on a camera, I want to know everything about its pros and cons. I'm particularly interested in the cons. Not because I want to bash a brand but because I know most £3k cameras are pretty excellent in most ways. The downsides are the easy way to differentiate.
If I'm spending this money, I want the best camera for me, for that money. If high DR is something I appreciate, maybe this camera isn't the best use of my £3k. Maybe I'll just buy something cheaper, or maybe I'll go Sony/Nikon. Maybe pixel count is my main concern and I'll use these results to determine that the DR on this camera is enough to meet my needs and I'll buy it. The point is, I want the review sites to test these things mercilessly. Then I'll know if, for my needs, they're worth the money.
Horshack: Great article Rishi. Keep the pressure up - even those that don't like reading about it now will come to appreciate it later when it leads to better sensors. And not just for Canon - Nikon dropped the ball with the D7100, which was a significant step back in terms of usable DR compared to the D7000, and fortunately corrected with the D7200. Sensors have been "good enough" for many years - they'll need to step up their game if they want to continue feeding from the prosumer upgrade trough.
I completely agree about the banding. I'm no expert in this kind of testing but I've used a few cameras in my time - a few Canons, Sony RX100, Nikon D800. I've generally found my real world experience to be broadly in line with the DXO scores for DR. However, I have felt (emphasis on felt - this is my user experience not my own detailed tests) that the area in which my experience deviated most from the DXO scores was when comparing the output from a camera known to have banding issues (7D) to those that didn't (everything else, including the 6D). Whatever the SNR, I didn't want to push the shadows on the 7D at all. For my personal taste, the banding killed it. Compare to even the 6D and I'd be happy to push the shadows quite a long way. Potentially, the extra aesthetic effect of a banding pattern is something that won't show up using a signal/noise based technique.
oselimg: And here is someone who doesn't know anything about photography, DR by most people's standards here but also doesn't give damn about gear lovers' current fetish. If you can bare not seeing any mention of DR, SNR etc.
Here is some help for those who doesn't want to read it. "His advice to young documentary photographers is, predictably, not technical: “You should have a good knowledge of history, of geopolitics, of sociology and anthropology to understand the society that we’re part of and to understand yourself and where you’re from in order to make choices. A lack of this knowledge will be much more limiting than any technical ability.”
Something about that URL suggests to me that it may not contain an objective analysis of the 5Ds/r, which is the subject of the article above.
1,3 and 6 stand out for me, with 1 being an absolute stunner. I'm not completely sold on the technique for some of the milky way landscapes, as the sky does sometimes look like it doesn't belong to the foreground. Processing is always a matter of personal taste though.
Mescalamba: Well EU is going in same direction of any dictature known to world. For long time now. Mostly they resemble communists (classic old CCCP type).
Whats left? Complete ban of weapons across EU so we couldnt defend ourselves (most countries cant already, hence the skyhight crime rate). Work camps, we dont have Siberia, but give them time, they will find something appropriate.
Also Im expecting tax for breathing quite soon. And law that forces you to accept at least one immigrant into your home. Warning, his family might be included.
Am I hyperbolic much? Wait and see..
Otherwise its bullsh*t, everything thats displayed outside in world is displayed free of charge. So any attempt to cash it somehow is very very low thing to do.
Also I have short message for EU..
"Dear EU, please kill yourself. As soon as possible."
and unicorns! You forgot unicorns!
Matt1645f4: Another reason to vote yes to leaving the EU in 2017........
Absurd as this potential legislation is, I hope those voting in the referendum will also find the time to consider a few other small factors:- economics- military alliances- the absence of war across Europe- preservation of western influence and values in the wider world- the UK's continuing importance to the USA- Food security- Energy security- Safeguarding of human rights- The ability to work together with like minded nations to influence the world's response to the most challenging threats to our future.
But yeah I know, they don't like us using old fashioned measuring systems and they once said something about curved bananas...
wil eelsing: I already pay. I pay local, national and EU taxes. I bleed money. Therefore, I feel that I'm entitled to some sort of co-ownership of the public infrastructure that I live in. I don't pay for photos of the house that I live in, and I certainly don't intend to pay for photos of the public environment I help to maintain. The very idea is obscene to me, totally unenforceable and yet another money-wasting idea of some MEP whom I didn't even get a chance to vote for, or against for that matter. Remember, MEPs are the ones who gave you "free of abnormal curvature" laws in cucumbers and bananas, only to have them repealed a few years later.
only to have them re-peeled a few years later...
I'll see myself out.
SteB: This proposal is absurd in the extreme. It is one thing to copyright a building design when the intention is to build a copy, or to reproduce plans of it. However, self-evidently a photograph of a building, is not a recreation of that building. It is especially absurd when that building is just in the background. At what degree of blur, would a building not be in a photograph?
The law is just making an ass of itself.
Adam2: Classic liberal socialism. Thank G-d I live in the U.S., though this country is quickly becoming like Europe.
This is not "classic liberal socialism". It is both illiberal and capitalist in nature.
Marty4650: The concept that public buildings can have copyrights is bizarre. If governments don't want them photographed perhaps they should erect tall fences to block then from view?
But no one is actually saying these public buildings cannot be photographed.
They just want you to obtain "permission" which probably means you will pay a royalty fee or a tax in order to photograph something that public money paid for.
Socialized governments can never have enough money to spend. I bet the Democrats in the USA are watching this closely.
Corporations making money out of something we'd consider to be a basic right afforded to all equally does not characterise a "socialised government".
One of my issues with this is that the skyline existed before people built on it. That view of the skyline belonged to everyone to do with what they wish. Developers of a new building don't pay us all for the rights to the skyline that they've just built on. Sure they've changed it, but that doesn't mean they own it. If anything they should consider it a privilege to be allowed to build on a skyline seen by so many.
There is no comparison between this and someone taking a photo of another photo and selling it. In the latter example, without the original photo there is no work. In the skyline example, the skyline and the city to which it relates are there regardless of the new building and the significance of the city and its views gives us so many reasons to photograph them, whether the new building is there or not.
AlexeyD: Sometimes I do wonder what part of their body was used to think of these new proposals... Definitely no head or brain was involved in the process.
Whatever will follow next - copyrighting nature sites and parks and charging for taking photos there? Charging for the air to breathe?
There are far more important things for EU parliament to discuss imo rather than coming up with new innovative ways to screw people.
But a skyline is THE skyline. You're correct that I wouldn't expect someone to make money out of a photo of one of my photos. However, if I printed it 1000ft high and stuck it on the side of the shard, I wouldn't expect to have any rights over the London skyline. That space, that view, belongs to everyone. You don't own it just because you've changed it with your building, any more than you own the rights to a view across a national park if you built a fence across it.
Frank C.: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/7
100 ISO +6EV compare Nikon vs Canon
Nikon kills ANYTHING Canon
shame....Canon's got some pretty good glass
I guess it'll eventually be used on the A7R II
Canon to become Sony premier's lens supplier!
Nobody is obsessed with underexposing by 6 stops. Nobody is suggesting you'd deliberately (or even accidentally) underexpose the whole scene by 6 stops. The 6 stops test is a good way of showing how much shadow pulling latitude a camera has. It may be that in order to capture the highlights you may need to underexpose another part of the image by 6 stops, but it will more likely be the case that you'll have underexposed part of the image by 3 or 4 stops. The 6 stops test will still give you a good guide as to how well those areas (not the whole image) can be recovered when processing the RAW in your chosen software.
Marty4650: Holy cow!
Not even a Silver Award!
Heads will roll in Seattle!
Anybody else singing that in the voice of Karen O?
Just me then...
brumd: OK, I am not in the market for this camera. After recently purchasing a Nikon Df, I don't have enough internal organs left to afford this one. But, I do understand why many people are so excited about it, and it is going to be very interesting to follow the next years how Sony's At system is going to mature.
But, am I the only one with this idea?
Just because camera developments in Canikons have steadied down a bit, it makes it a bit easier to spend a few thousand on a camera body, in the knowledge that at least for the next few years you'll be shooting with a device that delivers top IQ.
With these stormy developments of Sony, I am less likely to spend the sum of cash, just because I have the idea that in a year from now the model is seriously outclassed by the next 'achieving-the-impossible' camera.
I don't see it like that at all. The manufacturer failing to bring out a better camera doesn't make mine any better, and Sony will still be bringing out better cameras, just not on my upgrade path.
Although now... I guess they are on my upgrade path!
It's not actually that small is it? That's the problem I see. The shot at the top makes it look the size of a USB stick, but it isn't. This camera sounds like a great idea if it would be "always on me" or at least able to be carried in the same pocket as the iPhone itself, but that's not the case. If I'm going to have to make the decision to take the camera out with me, and free up a pocket for it, I may as well take the RX100 with its zoom lens and flash.
Bren Dyer: Sony seem to be an innovative company that continually bring out new products that dont quite fit the norm. I am a dedicated Nikon user but get a serious hardware hard on when I see the stuff Sony come out with. The A7 series is actually bloody good and I have been tempted on more than one account to jump ship. The biggest question for me is will it work well with my lenses especially the 70-200 2.8...The low light capabilities of these cameras MUST point it in the right direction for at the very least a second camera in a wedding shoot, if not the leading role...
Yes, a very serious hardware hard on!
I'm just here to applaud the use of the term "hardware hard on". Well done, well done indeed.
#6 is like a visual representation of what Sony just did.
EthanP99: Just cancelled my a7rii order for this.
Thematic: wow, even SLOG making it in as well? Gotta hand it to Sony that they do far less "saving features for the high end" compared to their competitors when releasing new models.
Agreed, I was meaning stills.