Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 01 Jul 2013 (Monday) 23:04
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon EOS 70D officially announced!

 
Matrim33
Senior Member
Avatar
268 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 11
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Seattle
     
Jul 05, 2013 21:22 |  #646

Is the noise performance on the T4i better than the 7D? I know I have read several articles saying the T3i had better high iso shots in low light as compared to the T4i.


6D - 50mm f/1.4 - 85mm f/1.8 - 24-105mm f/4L - 16-35mm f/2.8L II - 70-300mm f/4-5.6 - 600EX-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,158 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2468
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jul 05, 2013 21:28 |  #647

Matrim33 wrote in post #16095087 (external link)
Is the noise performance on the T4i better than the 7D? I know I have read several articles saying the T3i had better high iso shots in low light.

you can play around with this...i'm not sure i'd say the t3i, or t4i do better though...

http://www.dpreview.co​m …mple=img_6882.a​cr&x=0&y=0 (external link)


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,877 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3986
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jul 05, 2013 21:55 |  #648

Matrim33 wrote in post #16095087 (external link)
Is the noise performance on the T4i better than the 7D? I know I have read several articles saying the T3i had better high iso shots in low light as compared to the T4i.

That wouldn't surprise me at all.

I have used a 7D on several occasions, and found it to be worse than my 50D in some conditions. And I did not find it to be better than my 50D at any time, in any situation. So, if, based on my experience, the 7D is slightly worse than my 50D, it would not surprise me at all if it is also worse than the T4i, which is newer technology than either the 50D or 7D.

I very much hope that this new 70D is significantly better than any of the other 1.6 crop bodies, with respect to noise grain at intermediate ISOs in the 400-1600 range.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MilesW
Member
240 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Apr 2005
     
Jul 05, 2013 22:02 |  #649

I want to up grade from my 20D but to be honest I have no use for the Video features now being dumped on the public. I feel I am paying for something I have no need for where I could be putting that extra cost into a better product.


20D Canon EFS 17-85IS, 70-2001:4 L IS, Macro 100 F2.8, Canon 50 1.4Canon ext EF 1.4X II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Jul 05, 2013 22:08 |  #650

MilesW wrote in post #16095170 (external link)
I want to up grade from my 20D but to be honest I have no use for the Video features now being dumped on the public. I feel I am paying for something I have no need for where I could be putting that extra cost into a better product.

The reason they add video features to every camera is because it adds almost no cost. All the hardware is already there aside from a microphone. It's not making the camera more expensive to make. In fact, in widening the appeal and increasing sales, it might be reducing cost.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,158 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2468
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jul 05, 2013 22:18 |  #651

MilesW wrote in post #16095170 (external link)
I want to up grade from my 20D but to be honest I have no use for the Video features now being dumped on the public. I feel I am paying for something I have no need for where I could be putting that extra cost into a better product.

but how much more are you paying...when the 20D came out it was what, $1500?...so you're getting a better, newer camera for $1200, and they added video for free...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 05, 2013 22:56 |  #652

Tom Reichner wrote in post #16095157 (external link)
That wouldn't surprise me at all.

I have used a 7D on several occasions, and found it to be worse than my 50D in some conditions. And I did not find it to be better than my 50D at any time, in any situation. So, if, based on my experience, the 7D is slightly worse than my 50D, it would not surprise me at all if it is also worse than the T4i, which is newer technology than either the 50D or 7D.

That is something I find very surprising, because I actually have both the 50D and the 7D, and I've found the 7D to be superior in terms of image quality in every respect save one: low ISO artifacts in the very deep shadows. The 7D has that, the 50D doesn't.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 05, 2013 23:00 |  #653

tkbslc wrote in post #16095184 (external link)
The reason they add video features to every camera is because it adds almost no cost. All the hardware is already there aside from a microphone. It's not making the camera more expensive to make. In fact, in widening the appeal and increasing sales, it might be reducing cost.

That used to be true, because video used to simply be a matter of continuously capturing the information on the sensor.

But it no longer is, and the 70D is proof of that. How much R&D went into the phase detection sensor on the 70D? That is most certainly a feature that is primarily for video shooters. While it does have some use for still shots, most people who take still shots use the viewfinder, for which the phase detect imaging sensor is useless.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,583 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3771
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jul 05, 2013 23:08 |  #654

kcbrown wrote in post #16095268 (external link)
That used to be true, because video used to simply be a matter of continuously capturing the information on the sensor.

But it no longer is, and the 70D is proof of that. How much R&D went into the phase detection sensor on the 70D? That is most certainly a feature that is primarily for video shooters. While it does have some use for still shots, most people who take still shots use the viewfinder, for which the phase detect imaging sensor is useless.

I'm not so sure it's that simple though. This new AF system looks suspiciously like something that would be devolped for a mirrorless system... I have a feeling this was being developed with the next M in mind.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 05, 2013 23:11 |  #655

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16095284 (external link)
I'm not so sure it's that simple though. This new AF system looks suspiciously like something that would be devolped for a mirrorless system... I have a feeling this was being developed with the next M in mind.

Actually, you're probably right about that.

Even so, it's most certainly not R&D that's being put into DSLR still photography, which is really the point.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,583 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3771
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Jul 05, 2013 23:16 |  #656

kcbrown wrote in post #16095288 (external link)
Actually, you're probably right about that.

Even so, it's most certainly not R&D that's being put into DSLR still photography, which is really the point.

True, but again we're making assumptions since there are no RAW files from the 70D in the wild yet. I have yet to be really disappointed by the IQ of any Canon DSLR, so I'm pretty confident they'll do us well ;)


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ElectronGuru
Senior Member
Avatar
427 posts
Joined Apr 2009
Location: Oregon
     
Jul 05, 2013 23:57 as a reply to  @ EverydayGetaway's post |  #657

MilesW wrote in post #16095170 (external link)
I want to up grade from my 20D but to be honest I have no use for the Video features now being dumped on the public.

This is the price of standardization. If every major new feature required splitting the product line into models that get it and models that don't, 5 models would quickly become 10, 20, 40, 80, 160... Decision chaos aside, unit prices would rise dramatically. The alternative would be adding it to few/no models, with Nikon etc, taking sales for having it. It's just cheaper for everyone to buy the same.

Btw, I replaced my 20D with a 7D. My favorite feature was (and remained) the sensor cleaner, but live view (for critical focus, etc) quickly became central to my work flow. Live view is essentially video-without-recording and probably wouldn't exist without the drive for video.


"Light is the paint, lenses are brush, sensors are the canvas"
6D | 100L Macro | 50L | 24L TSE
Builder of custom flashlights, OVEREADY.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kcbrown
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,384 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Silicon Valley
     
Jul 06, 2013 00:25 |  #658

ElectronGuru wrote in post #16095353 (external link)
Btw, I replaced my 20D with a 7D. My favorite feature was (and remained) the sensor cleaner, but live view (for critical focus, etc) quickly became central to my work flow. Live view is essentially video-without-recording and probably wouldn't exist without the drive for video.

I doubt that. Live view existed as far back as the 40D, long before Canon put video into their cameras.

No, actually, I think video is actually a natural extension of live view, something Canon decided they may as well include as a distinguishing capability since the heavy lifting (live view) had already been done.


"There are some things that money can't buy, but they aren't Ls and aren't worth having" -- Shooter-boy
Canon: 2 x 7D, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, 55-250 IS, Sigma 8-16, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, other assorted primes, and a 430EX.
Nikon: D750, D600, 24-85 VR, 50 f/1.8G, 85 f/1.8G, Tamron 24-70 VC, Tamron 70-300 VC.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
49,926 posts
Gallery: 161 photos
Likes: 6664
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Jul 06, 2013 00:35 |  #659

kcbrown wrote in post #16095381 (external link)
I doubt that. Live view existed as far back as the 40D, long before Canon put video into their cameras....

"long before" is a bit of hyperbole here IMHO.

It was a direct line from the first Canon DSLR with Live view, (1D3 in Feb 2007) to the next logical step in a little over a year, the 5D2 in September 2008.

As soon as the 1D3 was released there was talk about the possibility of using Live view for Video.
(for the record, 40D was announced August of 2007)


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jorkata
Member
213 posts
Joined Sep 2009
     
Jul 06, 2013 00:51 |  #660

kcbrown wrote in post #16095288 (external link)
Even so, it's most certainly not R&D that's being put into DSLR still photography, which is really the point.

Advanced video AF does widen the appeal of the 70D - thus increasing sales and reducing cost, which was the original point.

Also, it's premature to assume that the dual-pixel AF is useless for stills. Just the opposite.

What people don't seem to realize is that the dual-pixel AF will (soon?) replace the AF module in a DSLR.

The AF module is a set of miniature lenses plus an AF sensor - working together to do phase detection.
Here's the 1DX AF module, for example:

IMAGE: http://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III_AF_Unit.jpg


Well, a sensor with dual-pixel AF is the exact same thing - except that the miniature lenses of the AF module are located on the chip itself, where they are known as microlenses.

In other words, a sensor with dual-pixel AF is essentially an AF-module-on-a-chip.

So, imagine this whole bulky thing above replaced by a single chip - offering not 61 but 10,061 AF points (or more).

Yes, they will do it for sure.
Because they can manufacture the chips cheaply - but still charge us a premium for the extra 10,000 AF points :mrgreen: .



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

289,868 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon EOS 70D officially announced!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Panzer90
1092 guests, 330 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.