|
Post by tohellwithhades on Oct 10, 2009 23:48:01 GMT -5
Right now I'm sticking with the 50mm f1.8 and 70-200mm f2.8 VR. I think the next one I would like to get would be the 85mm f1.4.
I hear you there, it took Canon awhile after Nikon introduced the D300, D700, and D3, but I think they got the noise under control with the 5D MkII (which is good because changing the system over would have been expensive). If you had had to switch though, I think you would have liked the D700, it's a great camera.
|
|
|
Post by xasaintx on Oct 12, 2009 6:48:53 GMT -5
Yeah, I would like to pick up a f/1.4 lens some day (or even better a f/1.2 *drool*) but I'm not sure whether to replace the nifty fifty or get the 85mm. If it were the f/1.2 I'd get the 85mm for sure, if the f/1.4 it could go either way.
Also, while the noise is getting better with Canon I wish they'd stop trying to cram in so many megapixels. I mean, if they'd gone for 14, 15 or even 16 MP instead of 18MP with the new 7D then the Noise performance could have been drastically better. New technology like mircolenses on the sensor may help but if they applied that technology to smaller MP sensors to improve the image quality rather than using it to maintain the current level of quality on higher MP sensors then there could be a huge leap forward.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by tohellwithhades on Oct 12, 2009 12:21:47 GMT -5
Haha, yeah, an f1.2 would be wicked. Although, with the D700's 12MP resolution, shooting wide-open at large apertures-- anything under f4--renders the subject details on the soft side. With the resolution of your full-frame though, this shouldn't be a problem.
Very very much agreed. Cramming more megapixels into the "cropped" sensor isn't helping at all (except for bright light bird photographers...).
|
|
|
Post by xasaintx on Oct 13, 2009 7:14:33 GMT -5
Hmm, I've not heard that the D700 renders details soft wide open before. Do you shoot in RAW or JPEG?
Chris
|
|
|
Post by tohellwithhades on Oct 13, 2009 16:30:45 GMT -5
I shoot in RAW
|
|
|
Post by xasaintx on Oct 14, 2009 20:52:46 GMT -5
Did you see the specs and sample images for the D3s? The images at 12,800 ISO are amazingly clean. I want to see what some of it's ISO 102,4000 images look like.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by tohellwithhades on Oct 14, 2009 21:15:04 GMT -5
Defn. man, that camera is going to be nuts. Looks like the people over at Nikon are going to set the bar even higher, heh. Can you imagine what will happen to the digital imaging industry once black silicon becomes of use? Imagine the ISO levels with that sensitive stuff.
|
|
|
Post by xasaintx on Oct 15, 2009 18:32:34 GMT -5
I've not really heard much on black silicone. So I don't know how it would improve things or how close the technology is.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by tohellwithhades on Oct 15, 2009 19:09:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by xasaintx on Oct 16, 2009 6:04:11 GMT -5
I'm imagining it's gonna be real expensive when it first hits.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by xasaintx on Oct 22, 2009 14:42:46 GMT -5
So, 1DIV was announced. Pretty much what I was expecting. If they'd made it full frame to lower the pixel density then I think it would have been able to rival the D3s's low light performance and basically been my perfect camera. So close.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by tohellwithhades on Oct 24, 2009 21:13:42 GMT -5
Agreed. I have no idea at all why Canon decided to put a cropped sensor in that camera.
|
|
|
Post by xasaintx on Oct 26, 2009 13:11:08 GMT -5
Partly it's because the sports and news shooters like the extra reach it gives. Partly it's to keep it running at 10fps at 16MP. If it was full frame they'd have to compromise on either the speed or the megapixels.
I wish they'd just admit Nikon did something well and make it full frame and allow for a crop mode on the sensor for extra speed.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by tohellwithhades on Oct 29, 2009 9:03:15 GMT -5
Yeah
|
|
|
Post by xasaintx on Nov 3, 2009 12:29:32 GMT -5
Well, I have about three and a half thousand photos to edit through from the past two weekends then I'll haver some more Festival gig photos to post.
Chris
|
|