-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Which System is Best?
- Thread starter JPLane
- Start date
Yeah, and I suppose you scoff at people who use tripods, too! It's not a case of folks who "refuse" to hold their cameras still. Sometimes, it's just not physically possible.
AK_2
Veteran Member
That's the standard I needed, that's what I found. It ain't perfect, but it's good enough for me.
On the other hand you have a perfect sytem (which ain't as good as mine), that you wish to improve upon . . . who's chasing the dream!!
Your posts only served to trol genuine tests and findings as to faults with the canon system . . .
Regards,
Kev
Yeah, and it's good enough for me, too. So what's your beef?
Chasing what dream? I'm a pragmatist. Autofocus is not 100% perfect. Nothing ever is. And I'm adding a split-prism focusing screen (not a dream, but a reality, mind you) to make the system even better.
Unlike some people, others spend less time in the shooting lab and more time out shooting. And let's not forget that your initial premise was that the EF system was not uniformly compatible amongst "certain combinations"-- which simply isn't true. Focus issues do exist, but it's not an aspect of system compatibility, or lack thereof. Furthermore, one should not ignore that focus issues have arisen in various other autofocus camera systems as well. You're just mixing a lot of issues and conclusions. Because you may have autofocus "issues" does not mean one should conclude that there is a lack of compatibility within the system.
cbeckPhoto
Forum Enthusiast
Hasen't it been discussed to death already?
DocDAT
Veteran Member
Those figures suggest that you either have extremely unrealistic expectations regarding your equipment, been astronomically unlucky or have too much time on your hands. I wonder how all the thousands of owners of the various cameras you've mentioned can possibly be getting sharp pictures if your claims are correct. As for me, I haven't had a single problem with my 350D yet, and the focus is perfect, even with the cheap 50mm 1.8 II.
Cephalotus
Veteran Member
Noise is only one problem, the biggest problem (imho) with very high resolution sensors are the lenses, the AF accuracity and diffraction.
Noise wise you can look on a Fuji F10. With that pixel size you could make an 31 MP ! fourthirds sensor.
This should be a lot more than enough.
Kodak has a chart about 4/3 sensors online and that shows a graph reaching 16MP.
If you need clean ISO 3200 at very high resolution to be happy I would propably recommed to pass on fourthirds.
Diffraction is a problem and it is higher than with APS-C sensors. But you have a bit more DOF with 4/3 so this will compensate for that, because you shoot 2/3 stops wider and still get enough DOF.
AF accuracity is excellent on my current E-1 and Zuiko lenses (couldn't say that about my 10D and Canon lenses). If AF accruacity is not good enough for perfectly sharp 6MP what's the sense of a 12MP sensor ?
Lens resolution depends on the used lenses. Some will be good enough for more than 10 MP and some not. This is true for all systems.
kind regards
Day Hiker
Veteran Member
My informal tests indicate that my Gitzo gives me a minimum 10 stops image stabilization. Maybe 20. It works with all lenses and is cross-platform compatible. No batteries required.
If you don't want to use a tripod, you "refuse" to hold your camera still. Everything in life is a choice. Everything.
--
Cheers,
Jim Pilcher
Colorado, USA
'Everything is full-frame if you don't think outside the box.' -- Me
cgbier
Veteran Member
T3 wrote:
Canon generally has a much faster pace of product development. Canon
Canon on the other is forced to produce and sell as much in the shortest time possible to get the investment back before the new camera comes out. That leads to compromises in QC (no time for it anymore as everything has to be rushed out). And with the flood of new models (together with the high investments) Canon keeps the prices high. would they produce their models longer, you'd be albe to get a brandnew 350XT for 600 bucks next year. Canon is more marketingbased.
As the DSLR have matured a lot, there is no big difference in picture quality from one modelrelease to the next anymore. So it actually doesn't make sense for companies to change cameras more often than their underwear.
If one Canon series would have problems to sell from begin on, Canon could get into financial trouble.
Maybe there are more threads about Canons because of they have more quality problems lately?
However, there is no BEST system in the world. good, best, better is very subjective.
Canon generally has a much faster pace of product development. Canon
Actually, this is why I prefer Nikon. Allthough this is not the Zeitgeist anymore, I prefer the conservative way of doing business like Nikon. It is less short term oriented and after the quick buck. with every outdated D100 Nikon still sells they make a very good profit. They can survive on lower sales (in units). Nikon is more engineeringbased.
Canon on the other is forced to produce and sell as much in the shortest time possible to get the investment back before the new camera comes out. That leads to compromises in QC (no time for it anymore as everything has to be rushed out). And with the flood of new models (together with the high investments) Canon keeps the prices high. would they produce their models longer, you'd be albe to get a brandnew 350XT for 600 bucks next year. Canon is more marketingbased.
As the DSLR have matured a lot, there is no big difference in picture quality from one modelrelease to the next anymore. So it actually doesn't make sense for companies to change cameras more often than their underwear.
If one Canon series would have problems to sell from begin on, Canon could get into financial trouble.
Maybe there are more threads about Canons because of they have more quality problems lately?
However, there is no BEST system in the world. good, best, better is very subjective.
DocDAT
Veteran Member
Saying that there's no need for IS and that one can just use a tripod is just plain silly. IS is a very useful feature in many circumstances, most notably being photographing sports, wildlife and doing photojournalism with long telezooms.
With your argumentation I guess there's no need for fast lenses either because you can just mount it on a tripod?
With your argumentation I guess there's no need for fast lenses either because you can just mount it on a tripod?
cgbier
Veteran Member
My best system btw is a good, old Nikon FM2 with a couple of stone old, but still nice, AIS lenses for B&W and a trusty CP5700 for color day to day shooting.
Both are very compact and fit my needs perfectly.
Both are very compact and fit my needs perfectly.
LOL. A tripod is slightly less MOBILE and takes longer to set up than IS, I believe! Not to mention that IS weighs a lot less and takes up a lot less room than even the lightest tripod!
Even if you're a very steady hand-holder, IS will STILL give you an advantage! I have a buddy who is a very big guy. He weighs about 270. He's rock-steady with a camera. And when he shoots weddings, in low light, with his 70-200/2.8L IS, he's able to use unbelievably show shutter speeds and still gets very sharp shots, thanks to his steady handholding plus IS. You can hear the shutter go KER...CHUNK because he's using such slow shutter speeds. He's definitely not using IS as a "crutch", and he's definitely not "refusing" to hold his camera still! He's using it because it works and gives him an advantage over just handholding alone-- just like everyone else who uses IS.
I've been using Nikon for a long time, but I continue to choose them because the quality is always there while the same cannot be said of Canon, which is the other system that would otherwise be worth considering for the pro market.
Since 1999, Nikon have released 10 DSLRs.
Of those, two have had common faults. The D2h and the D70. That's 20% of models.
Since 1999, Canon have also released 10 DSLRs.
Of those, 8 had common faults. That's 80%. And, I'm not talking about 'menu language problems'. I talking hardware problems and major software/firmware problems that required 1 or more firmware updates to rectify. Problems like:
1D: Banding problems, bug-fix firmware update
D60: Bug-fix Firmware updates
10D: Focus problems, bug-fix firmware updates.
1DII: Orientation sensor problems, card corruptions, image loss, bug-fix firmware updates.
20D: Focus problems, lockups, card corruptions, faulty battery grips, several bug-fix firmware updates [3 within 2 weeks in fact!!].
1DsII: Firmware updates, card corruptions, lockups, image losses.
350xt: Firmware updates, image losses.
Other manufacturers like Oly, Pentax, K-M also manage to have few or no widespread problems.
In your place any of the current systems [so long as they are working] would likely serve your needs.
Personally Nikon is my choice. They have good reliability, a massive lens/accessory range and a good overall product range. Good worldwide service facilities and a huge 2nd hand and aftermarket range.
Canon: are fine for the same reasons, so long as you don't get a dud or buy in the first month after release.
Oly: has limited lenses and no IS/VR. That said if there current lens range covers what you want, then it is a very good system. The E-1 especially is a pro body for an amateur price.
K-M: have 2 reasonable bodies. A limited lens choice though and their only compelling factor is in-body AS. If that doesn't interest you, then there is nothing to see here.
Pentax: Not bad but nothing compelling.
Of course, T'Pol fails to mention that firmware updates are something that all DSLR manufacturers use, and many of these firmware updates are fixes to very minor things (like changing the characters in the Chinese language menu!), and that Nikon has had its own numerous issues with back-focusing, as well as metering failures, even in their top-level bodies. And that image losses with some CF cards was due to an issue at the media card manufacturer. And of course, here's an example of Nikon's impeccable quality:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=14271844
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=14271844
AK_2
Veteran Member
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1018&message=14397894
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=14376573
20d af performance, tested using http://www.canon-dslr.com
With f4 - just within 1 x dof (depth of field)
with f2.8 - nearly within 1/2 x dof
with f1.8 - just within 1 x dof (f4 was slightly more consistent)
with f1.4 / f1.2 - well outside 1 x dof
Most of the equipment tested is not mine.
How can these be unrealistic expectations - when canon inc for a long time has shared the same specification - albeit not all countries know it or publish it. How can they be unrealistic when the 1d series meets and exceeds them. How can they be unrealistic when the d60 meets them.
Just to help you out with the above, as you clearly have no comprehension of what is reasonable focus performance. You use of the word 'perfect' to describe your af performance shows your bias and lack of knowledge in this regard. In future you should say, good enough for your needs, then post some pictures so we can evaluate where 'your needs' stand in the scale of beginner to expert.
With f4 - just within 1 x dof - this is a minimum acceptable standard
with f2.8 - nearly within 1/2 x dof - this is very good standard
with f1.8 - just within 1 x dof - this is minimum acceptable standard
with f1.4 / f1.2 - well outside 1 x dof - this is not acceptable
For the most part the 20d focuses within 1 x dof, which is a minium acceptable standard. Those with higher standards or better experience may want or need accuracy which is within 1/2 x dof, in which case the 1d series achieves that. Most of the pros I know want and expect this - albeit few of them have put a number of value to it, but i have tested items which didn't meet thier needs and items which did.
However, outside of 1 x dof is clearly not a reasonalbe std for a manufacturer to sell and produce an af system to. If you think it is, or you think this is perfect then I'd be gratefull if you sent a letter to canon with a cheque for £100 thanking them for their efforts, as you obviously like handing over money for nothing!!!
Although, plenty of users, that are happy with their equipment (mostly 10d's I tested in this regard) were actually between 2x and 3 x dof, well outside a reasonable spec, but the user was happy and didn't know their was any problem.
Rgeards,
Kev
AK_2
Veteran Member
1dmk2 also had the hair trigger vertical button.
The 1dmk2 had canon cps running ragged at euro 2004 and wimbledon as they tried to pacify pros with problems. The reds was another that many suffered. Also excessively noisey sensors where being shipped in units, when they should not have been (money saving).
Regards,
Kev
Not to forget how canon likes customers to pay for canon's mistakes;
Weather proof seals, are marketed, but if they fail customer pays.
Bent pins, customre pays.
Misaligned sensor, customer pays, with canon claiming camera was damaged (in this cae a 6 day old camera with no external marks, only tested indoors).
DocDAT
Veteran Member
Let me rephrase myself: You might have tested some broken equipment or not, but you can hardly generalize from those results, since most people don't have a problem, including professional photographers and enthusiasts alike.
LOL. Whatever.
Well I guess you've exposed yourself as having freakishly high demands of AF. If you look at the previously posted picture, you'll see that the line is exactly in the middle of the DOF + - 1 mm. There is about 1 cm total DOF with ½ cm on each side of the marked line. If you mean this is far from perfect and can merely be called "good enough for my needs" then you are truly beyond reason.
The ruler is lying at an angle so you can't use it to judge the DOF. Rather the square patterns on the paper which are ½ cm.
Nathan A Luna
Leading Member
Nikon glass is superior in my eyes. That's all that matters. Canon L glass is equally respectable, but I believe overall quality is better with Nikon.
--
Learning. Day by day. How exciting.
--
Learning. Day by day. How exciting.
DigitalPowerShot
Veteran Member
--
Some pictures:
http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/22446
NEW Please sign my guestbook:
http://www.digitalpowershot.com
Some pictures:
http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/22446
NEW Please sign my guestbook:
http://www.digitalpowershot.com
A. M. Hughes
Forum Enthusiast
As we all strive for the perfect image, keep in mind that there will never be a perfect tool/system. Go with what you can afford in the way of equipment and concentrate on evolving the most important tool in your arsenal, the one between your ears.
A.M.H.
A.M.H.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum