bronxbombers4

Joined on Sep 6, 2012

Comments

Total: 359, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: I'm still dubious about the DR since 80D and 1DX2 still don't quite cut it, still can't match Nikon cameras of a few years ago. I hope they somehow have improved again since the 80D and 1DX2, but I'm dubious.

@John C Tharp - OK, hah, well yeah that is why I am worried

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 20:22 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

The Squire: 4K video in MotionJPEG format? I was hoping for GIF...

focus peaking doesn't always work so well, but 100% zoom boxes are perfection for focusing, ML allows it and some other cameras have that, so it's not so much that not having focus peaking is terrible it's not having that 100% zoom window live during recording and not having zebras

500Mbps is a bit of a pain

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 20:16 UTC
In reply to:

Lawn Lends: And the Craigslist 16-35 2.8L II flood begins....

yeah the MTF look way better

and the 24-105L will likely sink to even lower lows since the new one appears like it might be considerably sharper at landscape/scenics apertures and might actually be perfectly good for that stuff now unlike the one which always seemed pretty mediocre for the price in what it delivered for landscape/scenics work

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 20:06 UTC
In reply to:

stevo23: I can't wait to see how this changes/improves the 24-105.

check some of the links here for the MTF charts and comments

to me the MTF seem to show the new one even worse at 24mm f/4 BUT, likely much more importantly for 24mm, considerably better at 24mm f/8 than the old one to the point it might actually be pretty good for landscape work (of course field curvature and CA and so on remain to be seen and how well charts match reality, but it seems promising for stopped down landscape/scenics work which the old one was fairly weak at).

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 20:04 UTC
In reply to:

TheDman: Looking forward to seeing some MTF charts.

@Earth Art - the 24-105 II to me looks to be even worse at 24mm f/4 than the old one, but, probably more importantly for 24mm, much better at 24mm f/8 than the old one.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 20:02 UTC
In reply to:

TheDman: Looking forward to seeing some MTF charts.

http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/standard-zoom/ef24-105-f4lii/spec.html
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/standard-zoom/ef24-105-f4l/spec.html
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/standard-zoom/ef24-70-f4l/spec.html
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/standard-zoom/ef24-70-f28l-ii/spec.html
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/wide-zoom/ef16-35-f28liii/spec.html
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/wide-zoom/ef16-35-f4l-is-usm/spec.html
http://cweb.canon.jp/ef/lineup/wide-zoom/ef16-35-f28lii/spec.html

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 20:01 UTC

The corner performance would appear to be radically improved for the 16-35 III compared to II.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 19:59 UTC as 6th comment

Interesting, 24mm was a nasty weak spot for the 24-105L for scenic/landscape work.

All going by the MTF charts of course and nothing more:
The new version looks even worse there at f/4! But, OTOH, where it probably matters more for 24mm, at landscape f/8, it looks like it may be very considerably improved. Not that you can always go by the MTF for real world landscapes due to curvature effects and so on, but it looks to be much, much better than the original version 24mm f/8 and even better than the 24-70 f/4 IS although not the 24-70 2.8 II 24mm f/8.

So for the scenic type shooter the new 24-105 just might be quite an upgrade over the old version.

It seems to lack and UD/SUD.Fluorite though so have to see about CA.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 19:57 UTC as 7th comment
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: I'm still dubious about the DR since 80D and 1DX2 still don't quite cut it, still can't match Nikon cameras of a few years ago. I hope they somehow have improved again since the 80D and 1DX2, but I'm dubious.

If Canon managed to put their first refinement to their on chip ADC could it end up giving an extra say .4 DR compared to 1DX2 at 8MP normalization levels? In that case you could be talking 14.15DR and only 1/3 stop behind ISO100 performance of Nikon and even a little better than Sony. Of course that is a big if.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 06:57 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: I'm still dubious about the DR since 80D and 1DX2 still don't quite cut it, still can't match Nikon cameras of a few years ago. I hope they somehow have improved again since the 80D and 1DX2, but I'm dubious.

OK, did the calcs and it would end up, using DxO numbers, around 13.75 for the 5D4 vs 13.89 for A7R II, pretty close to what Sony manages for now for DR then. Although D750 does 14.53 so a ways behind Nikon and D810 can do even more.

Perhaps not worth dealing with adapters and this and that just for Sony if it worked out like that with no gotcha's (and I could swear the 1DX2 demo samples seemed more than .4 stops behind A7R II, but I'll take it as correct) if all you do is stills. Nikon system could definitely do better and one wonders A7R III next year might not manage what D810 can do now....

And then one wonders if the 5D4 can match A7R II video quality though. Of course it does AF and all that stuff better. But is one 5D4 better than a 5D3 + A7R II? In some ways, but not so sure in all or if in enough ways. And it seems highly unlikely to be as good of a body as a D820 next year (assuming Nikon doesn't somehow bungle up the video).

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 06:55 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

James Booba: From someone whos interested in video ... 4K 1.74x crop. Aha.

Next news...

wt*f Canon are you kiddin me?

to be fair, even the A7R II only delivers top quality 4k in crop mode, these sensors just have too many MP, you need something lower MP like A7S II for FF and top quality 4k. That said, I have a weird feeling the 5D4 crop 4k might be only about the same quality as what the A7R II manages in FF mode.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 06:28 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: Hmm dualpixel AF great for when it works, but when it doesn't STILL no 100% view focusing box. Still no zebras. Good grief Canon those a basic LOW end usability features not some high end crazy stuff.

HDR video sounds awesome but it only works in a waxy, blurry sub-1080P 1080P mode.

4k has no LOG profile!? And is it is a sharp and natural as the over-sampled Sony video of a year ago?

Video is a big step up but it feels like it's already partly behind and might be well behind in just another 12 months.

No special fast more efficient compression for 4k is a shame, maybe it would heat up the body, but sometimes you only need to shoot a few minutes at a time, for nature stuff for instance, for much stuff actually, and would rather deal with the heat than the big files.

I could see the 5D5 finally getting video all correct. But man another 4 years out.

@Donnie G - some of these 'trolls' have been shooting Canon since the 1970s, which might well be longer than you have or 85% of the other rabid fanboys have
(although some have also finally partly given up and started using other brand bodies for lots of stuff)

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 06:24 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: I'm still dubious about the DR since 80D and 1DX2 still don't quite cut it, still can't match Nikon cameras of a few years ago. I hope they somehow have improved again since the 80D and 1DX2, but I'm dubious.

@Rishi - regarding the last thing, I just mentioned it in reference to something someone else said (but was lazy and just tagged it onto the end of my response to you without noting that, sorry for the confusion)

Yeah, too tired to calculate it now, but maybe 30MP vs 20MP is enough to get it to A7R II level even if not D810. Often pixel-level DR stays relatively similar across pixel sizes for a given tech.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 06:22 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

peeyaj: This would perhaps become the go-to camera for 4k video stealing the crown of GH4 and A7s series. The 5D series is a classic in videography.

5D4 should have had gamma profiles too. It's just a bit of software that they already have coded and finished for the 1DX2. It would cost basically nothing for them to have put it in the 5D4.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:33 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

ttran88: Is there a way for me to shoot with dual pixel through the OVF? I don't want to hold a heavy DSLR out like a smartphone to have accurate AF.

You can find something like the zacuto for a fraction of the price that will do the job.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:31 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: Hmm dualpixel AF great for when it works, but when it doesn't STILL no 100% view focusing box. Still no zebras. Good grief Canon those a basic LOW end usability features not some high end crazy stuff.

HDR video sounds awesome but it only works in a waxy, blurry sub-1080P 1080P mode.

4k has no LOG profile!? And is it is a sharp and natural as the over-sampled Sony video of a year ago?

Video is a big step up but it feels like it's already partly behind and might be well behind in just another 12 months.

No special fast more efficient compression for 4k is a shame, maybe it would heat up the body, but sometimes you only need to shoot a few minutes at a time, for nature stuff for instance, for much stuff actually, and would rather deal with the heat than the big files.

I could see the 5D5 finally getting video all correct. But man another 4 years out.

Yeah the no LOG is shocking. So much for the talk that they were taking it seriously this time. Even some $1500 camera have 4k with LOG profiles now!

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:30 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: Hmm dualpixel AF great for when it works, but when it doesn't STILL no 100% view focusing box. Still no zebras. Good grief Canon those a basic LOW end usability features not some high end crazy stuff.

HDR video sounds awesome but it only works in a waxy, blurry sub-1080P 1080P mode.

4k has no LOG profile!? And is it is a sharp and natural as the over-sampled Sony video of a year ago?

Video is a big step up but it feels like it's already partly behind and might be well behind in just another 12 months.

No special fast more efficient compression for 4k is a shame, maybe it would heat up the body, but sometimes you only need to shoot a few minutes at a time, for nature stuff for instance, for much stuff actually, and would rather deal with the heat than the big files.

I could see the 5D5 finally getting video all correct. But man another 4 years out.

@Donnie G - I'd rather have the option for short takes at top quality than not. How long do I ever shoot any scene for more than a minute anyway?

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:30 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: Great intro article. :) Well done as always...

Being very nitpicky I'd say "with the exception of the Canon EOS 6D ...then the following : Canon DSLRs prior to the 1D X Mark II and 80D were known for poor shadow recovery, due to high levels of read noise."

The 6D has excellent shadow recovery and no banding :)

Shadow recovery and DR are basically the same thing since these sensors are linear.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:28 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

bronxbombers4: I'm still dubious about the DR since 80D and 1DX2 still don't quite cut it, still can't match Nikon cameras of a few years ago. I hope they somehow have improved again since the 80D and 1DX2, but I'm dubious.

Only half way to Nikon just isn't enough, another four years of shooting like that? Nikon only just gets enough extra to make lots of natural scenes fit.

And why could it not be better than 1DX2? The MP count has little to do with DR.
DR is different than low light capability also, they two entirely different things.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:27 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (1920 comments in total)
In reply to:

cgarrard: Great intro article. :) Well done as always...

Being very nitpicky I'd say "with the exception of the Canon EOS 6D ...then the following : Canon DSLRs prior to the 1D X Mark II and 80D were known for poor shadow recovery, due to high levels of read noise."

The 6D has excellent shadow recovery and no banding :)

6D is many stops behind Sony/Nikon, yeah better than 5D3 or 5D2 but that doesn't say much.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 05:20 UTC
Total: 359, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »