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 13 Apr 2014 (Sunday) 16:07
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What are your thoughts about cameras for 2014

 
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
4,083 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 647
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Apr 14, 2014 16:35 |  #46

hollis_f wrote in post #16832009 (external link)
Nope.

The 7D gives a much better result for one vital parameter - pixels per bird.

Surprised at your post Hollis.
I spent some time with a friend testing the 7D against the 1D3 we, like most people, found the 1D3 a better camera IQ wise. Some time later I got a 1D4 and then his 1D3 couldn't equal it for IQ - so my friend got one. After a few years of being happy I traded and got the 1DX, again the 1D4/1D3/7D are not in the running.
If pixel density is so important why am I getting better pictures with my sensor? After all it is only the equivalent of about 7MP in Canon APSC terms. I agree there is a difference in reach but it small even with Canon's best lenses. As to the ISO advantages - well that is another story!
Note I am not comparing frame rates AF etc - that would not be fair.


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Candid
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
45 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
     
Apr 14, 2014 16:35 |  #47

I agree that a lot of people will shoot jpeg. This in my view tends to revolve around speed. Sports photographers, and people who don't want the hassle of post production.

I like the previous poster am concerned about maximising the final image, and for me that means RAW. The full uncompressed, up to me what happens image. Allows me the potential I require to make the image what I see and interpret




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Apr 14, 2014 17:45 |  #48

johnf3f wrote in post #16833517 (external link)
If pixel density is so important why am I getting better pictures with my sensor? After all it is only the equivalent of about 7MP in Canon APSC terms. I agree there is a difference in reach but it small even with Canon's best lenses.

Apparently you are getting closer or using larger lenses. That reach difference isn't small. To get a bird comparably framed with the same lens and crop it to the same image size your 1DX would need to be about 45MP.

Not saying I wouldn't give up my 7D for a 1DX in a heartbeat if the price was the same though. :-)


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,999 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1615
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
Apr 14, 2014 21:12 |  #49

kfreels wrote in post #16833678 (external link)
Apparently you are getting closer or using larger lenses. That reach difference isn't small. To get a bird comparably framed with the same lens and crop it to the same image size your 1DX would need to be about 45MP.

Not saying I wouldn't give up my 7D for a 1DX in a heartbeat if the price was the same though. :-)

I think it would be better to say that to crop to the same dimensions on the sensor will give you substantially more pixels (resolution) in the final image, at what ever size you output it. I think that is a more accurate way of stating the situation. But lets face it if your crop from a 7D leaves you with say 8 Mpix then a similar area cropped from a 22 Mpix FF body will leave you with about 3.5 Mpix! That's the difference between around 2300×1500 pixels and 3500×2300 pixels. It is probably the situation that most focal length limited shooters end up with at the end of the day.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Apr 15, 2014 06:21 |  #50

catclaw wrote in post #16830910 (external link)
All of you do realize that a new 7D may never happen right?? The 1Ds sat around for 5 years too without an update when it just stopped production and was integrated into the 1D line.

The 5D III is essentially the 7D but as a full frame and 2 frames per second slower. When a body has been sitting around for so long past it's update cycle, it starts to become apparent that an update isn't going to happen and the body is going to be absorbed into another line.

Rumours have been suggesting for a while that the 7D Mark II will be 10 frames per second, that's quite a big improvement over the 5D3.
There is a market out there for a crop high frames per second cameras. Sports photographers and wildlife photographers are generally picking the 7D over the 5D3. Why? Well 8 frames per second and reach is important.
You will notice professional sports photography is either the 1DX or the 7D for those of less means.


Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
4,083 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 647
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Apr 15, 2014 07:58 |  #51

kfreels wrote in post #16833678 (external link)
Apparently you are getting closer or using larger lenses. That reach difference isn't small. To get a bird comparably framed with the same lens and crop it to the same image size your 1DX would need to be about 45MP.

Not saying I wouldn't give up my 7D for a 1DX in a heartbeat if the price was the same though. :-)

Since well before I bought the 1DX I normally carry the 300 F2.8 IS and the 800 F5.6 IS and tend to frequent the same hides/locations.
I agree that the larger sensors will put considerably fewer pixels on target and that will make a difference in ones ability to crop assuming a lens of sufficient resolution. Perhaps I didn't put it very well but what I am getting at is that the difference has proved to be much smaller than I was expecting. When I moved from 1.6 to 1.3 crop I didn't feel that I had lost any significant reach and the same has now happened when going from 1.3 crop to full frame.
I am not the only one finding this, an acquaintance of mine currently has his 1D4 up for sale as he prefers the full frame files from his 5D3. Additionally he is using a 300mm shorter lens, for small birds, so he should be even more affected by the lack of full frame reach.
To me the larger sensors offer more pros than cons.


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Apr 15, 2014 17:46 |  #52

johnf3f wrote in post #16835023 (external link)
Since well before I bought the 1DX I normally carry the 300 F2.8 IS and the 800 F5.6 IS and tend to frequent the same hides/locations.
I agree that the larger sensors will put considerably fewer pixels on target and that will make a difference in ones ability to crop assuming a lens of sufficient resolution. Perhaps I didn't put it very well but what I am getting at is that the difference has proved to be much smaller than I was expecting. When I moved from 1.6 to 1.3 crop I didn't feel that I had lost any significant reach and the same has now happened when going from 1.3 crop to full frame.
I am not the only one finding this, an acquaintance of mine currently has his 1D4 up for sale as he prefers the full frame files from his 5D3. Additionally he is using a 300mm shorter lens, for small birds, so he should be even more affected by the lack of full frame reach.
To me the larger sensors offer more pros than cons.

Well yeah. It really does come down to personal preference. I would love to own the equipment you have but I can't even come close to justifying it. So I have to suffer with a 200mm f2.8 that at least appears to me as your 300mm does to you and with a frame rate that comes as close as I can get to yours for a fraction of the cost.


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
catclaw
Senior Member
344 posts
Joined Apr 2014
     
Apr 15, 2014 17:55 |  #53
bannedPermanent ban

kfreels wrote in post #16836514 (external link)
Well yeah. It really does come down to personal preference. I would love to own the equipment you have but I can't even come close to justifying it. So I have to suffer with a 200mm f2.8 that at least appears to me as your 300mm does to you and with a frame rate that comes as close as I can get to yours for a fraction of the cost.

My opinion is that the only place where the equipment matters is in sports and wildlife. And contingently, equipment only matters if you are doing big enlargements of landscape as well. For everything else, a T1i or a 20D is fine.


TriExposure (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Apr 15, 2014 18:13 |  #54

catclaw wrote in post #16836538 (external link)
My opinion is that the only place where the equipment matters is in sports and wildlife. And contingently, equipment only matters if you are doing big enlargements of landscape as well. For everything else, a T1i or a 20D is fine.

Well.........They will probably do in a pinch, but I wouldn't call them fine. There is little difference between shooting sports and toddlers or pets playing in the yard.

I do portraits a lot with studio lights and tethered. It's the absolute best way to get a baby, pet, or small child. But on either of those cameras if you do this, your live-view is completely black unless you shoot with a slow shutter speed and wide open. This is because you can't disable "exposure simulation" on these cameras. Also, the 20D maxes out as ISO 3200 which is (h). It really only has a max iso of 1600 and it was anything but clean. I really don't care for any of the rebels because they lack the Quick Control Dial. I love the 7D for it's customizable buttons and custom settings.

Different cameras have different features which benefit different people in different ways. While it's true that you can do most of anything with most cameras if you really try and plan appropriately, what you pay for is the ability to do the things you want easier and more efficiently with greater chance of success and that's the same no matter what you're doing. With nature and sports, reach and fps become important. But in other situations, other features become just important to those subjects.

Of course I'm probably just arguing for the sake of argument. I'm still a bit grumpy after being out of the hospital 2 weeks and still not quite being able to get back out and shoot. lol


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
catclaw
Senior Member
344 posts
Joined Apr 2014
     
Apr 15, 2014 20:07 |  #55
bannedPermanent ban

kfreels wrote in post #16836594 (external link)
Well.........They will probably do in a pinch, but I wouldn't call them fine. There is little difference between shooting sports and toddlers or pets playing in the yard.

I do portraits a lot with studio lights and tethered. It's the absolute best way to get a baby, pet, or small child. But on either of those cameras if you do this, your live-view is completely black unless you shoot with a slow shutter speed and wide open. This is because you can't disable "exposure simulation" on these cameras. Also, the 20D maxes out as ISO 3200 which is (h). It really only has a max iso of 1600 and it was anything but clean. I really don't care for any of the rebels because they lack the Quick Control Dial. I love the 7D for it's customizable buttons and custom settings.

Different cameras have different features which benefit different people in different ways. While it's true that you can do most of anything with most cameras if you really try and plan appropriately, what you pay for is the ability to do the things you want easier and more efficiently with greater chance of success and that's the same no matter what you're doing. With nature and sports, reach and fps become important. But in other situations, other features become just important to those subjects.

Of course I'm probably just arguing for the sake of argument. I'm still a bit grumpy after being out of the hospital 2 weeks and still not quite being able to get back out and shoot. lol

I hope you're getting better man!


TriExposure (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Apr 15, 2014 21:19 |  #56

catclaw wrote in post #16836875 (external link)
I hope you're getting better man!

Yeah. I am. And thanks. It's just not happening as fast as I want it too and I'm not the patient type. :lol:


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
4,083 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 647
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Apr 16, 2014 07:13 |  #57

kfreels wrote in post #16836514 (external link)
Well yeah. It really does come down to personal preference. I would love to own the equipment you have but I can't even come close to justifying it. So I have to suffer with a 200mm f2.8 that at least appears to me as your 300mm does to you and with a frame rate that comes as close as I can get to yours for a fraction of the cost.

I can't justify my gear either! I just wanted the best that was available and I am almost there. Note I was on a low income until I was made redundant, now I am on a very low income, so one can have the toys if one wants them enough!


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alistairm1
Member
52 posts
Joined Aug 2008
     
Apr 20, 2014 05:15 as a reply to  @ johnf3f's post |  #58

Having just lost my beloved 50D (left in the Hertz car rental office at JFK, and it wasn't handed in as lost property), I'm in the market for a replacement.
Still want a crop, but would prefer something as substantial as the 50D, as I found the 60D to be a tad "plasticky" for my taste. Not checked out the 70D as I expect it to be very similar to the 60D.
The 7D was not available when I got my last camera, and it didn't seem sufficient of an upgrade in terms of features I wanted to prompt me to change then.
Now, however, it seems to be the best option to replace the missing 50D.
If the Mark II is due out soon, I will probably hang on for that to be released.


Canon 5DIII ¦ EOS M ¦ EF-M 18-55 F3.5-5.6 IS STM ¦ (EF-S 17-85mm IS F4.5-5.6 USM [Retired]) ¦ Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG OS ¦ Canon 24-105 f4 L ¦ Σ 150-500 mm F5-6.3 DG APO HSM ¦ Tokina AT-X 400AF 400mm F5.6 ¦ Canon 90EX ¦ Σ EF-530 DG Super ¦ Manfrotto 190 tripod ¦ Manfrotto 680 monopod

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Candid
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
45 posts
Joined Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
     
Apr 20, 2014 05:27 |  #59

I'm currently saving my pennies as we speak. Prefer to buy outright and know it's paid for.

If a new camera comes along fine, if not I'll be buying whats available. 7D is a good price right now. 6D also. Think I'm gonna really save and get both. Crop for sports, FF for all else.

My other half will be pleased




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Perfectly ­ Frank
I'm too sexy for my lens
4,429 posts
Gallery: 58 photos
Likes: 1808
Joined Oct 2010
     
Apr 20, 2014 12:29 |  #60

johnf3f wrote in post #16835023 (external link)
Since well before I bought the 1DX I normally carry the 300 F2.8 IS and the 800 F5.6 IS and tend to frequent the same hides/locations.
I agree that the larger sensors will put considerably fewer pixels on target and that will make a difference in ones ability to crop assuming a lens of sufficient resolution. Perhaps I didn't put it very well but what I am getting at is that the difference has proved to be much smaller than I was expecting. When I moved from 1.6 to 1.3 crop I didn't feel that I had lost any significant reach and the same has now happened when going from 1.3 crop to full frame.
I am not the only one finding this, an acquaintance of mine currently has his 1D4 up for sale as he prefers the full frame files from his 5D3. Additionally he is using a 300mm shorter lens, for small birds, so he should be even more affected by the lack of full frame reach.
To me the larger sensors offer more pros than cons.

I find your comments interesting, as I use the 1D4 and 300 II & 1.4xIII for aircraft in flight. Even at 420mm most of my shots are cropped.

I'd like to get a second body - perhaps another 1D4 or the 5D3. The larger fov offered by the 5D3 means an airplane will appear smaller in the frame. But the extra 6mp for cropping might offset that.

Maybe like you I may feel that I have not lost any significant reach by using the 5D3.
Anyway, just something for me to think about.


When you see my camera gear you'll think I'm a pro.
When you see my photos you'll know that I'm not.

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

6,282 views & 0 likes for this thread
What are your thoughts about cameras for 2014
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 umerbilal
1317 guests, 257 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.