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 General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
Thread started 26 Apr 2016 (Tuesday) 22:17
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Nikons new D500 vs the Canon 7DII

 
flowrider
Goldmember
Avatar
3,585 posts
Gallery: 124 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 787
Joined Dec 2009
Location: 604
Post edited over 3 years ago by flowrider.
     
May 27, 2016 10:32 |  #61

John Koerner wrote in post #17991794 (external link)
I have attacked no person here, only shared the facts and the charts to back them up on why I did what I did.

I won't say anything further here. Denial of the facts isn't rebuttal; it is only denial.

How about less charts and just post some photos? Honestly without EXIF most people can't tell the difference anyhow. And by photos I don't mean photos of brick walls or charts to see resolving power or how sharp it is in the corners. Edit**I like the photo of the butterfly. Could you tell the difference if it was printed?

This thread is quite comical how everyone's panties are in a bunch. Just back away from the keyboard and go take some photos, everyone appreciates good photos no matter what camera they came from. Iconic images come from the photographer not the camera.


~Steve~
~ My Website-stevelowephoto.com (external link) ~ Facebook (external link)
Feedback Feedback Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
cuongduong
Member
197 posts
Likes: 19
Joined May 2008
Location: Dallas
     
May 27, 2016 10:59 |  #62

Brand zealotry is fascinating, and it generates a lot of money for camera reviewers and bloggers.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Koerner
Senior Member
734 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by John Koerner. (2 edits in all)
     
May 27, 2016 14:32 |  #63
bannedPermanent ban

flowrider wrote in post #18020762 (external link)
How about less charts and just post some photos? Honestly without EXIF most people can't tell the difference anyhow. And by photos I don't mean photos of brick walls or charts to see resolving power or how sharp it is in the corners.

Um, I did post a photo ... lol :rolleyes:


flowrider wrote in post #18020762 (external link)
Edit**I like the photo of the butterfly. Could you tell the difference if it was printed?

Ah-ha, you noticed!

To answer your question, I can tell the difference blown up in my screen, and printed, YES. Most definitely.

It is only in little 800 px images that the difference isn't very noticeable.


flowrider wrote in post #18020762 (external link)
This thread is quite comical how everyone's panties are in a bunch.

I am pretty sure it's the people with the out-dated, inferior equipment whose panties are in a bunch ... those with top equipment are simply satisfied ;-)a


flowrider wrote in post #18020762 (external link)
Just back away from the keyboard and go take some photos, everyone appreciates good photos no matter what camera they came from. Iconic images come from the photographer not the camera.

True, and well said.

In fact, if you go re-read the post with the butterfly, it was taken with a lowly 7D ... but the image is still beautiful, because the subject is simply beautiful.

I agree with your point: We all appreciate beautiful subjects, the tools we choose just help us capture them optimally or sub-optimally, based on our choices.

Certainly, any modern mid-level DSLR, with a decent lens, can capture fine images. No doubt.

Now Pay Attentions here: bw!

It is ALSO "okay" to be a gear freak, and get excited by GEAR :twisted:

It is also okay not to be satisfied with mediocrity, nor to make excuses for it, but to strive for the best you can do, within your budget.

In fact, in case you haven't noticed, we are in the GEAR TALK FORUM, are we not? So don't tell me to "go take some photos," when 1) I already have and 2) I am talking about gear in a gear forum, LMAO

Instead, wake-up and smell the coffee

IMAGE: http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/images/smilies/coffee.png

Realize where you are, a Gear Forum, so if you don't like discussing gear then move on over to the images section ...

Cheers and touché

Jack



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flowrider
Goldmember
Avatar
3,585 posts
Gallery: 124 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 787
Joined Dec 2009
Location: 604
     
May 27, 2016 14:44 |  #64

John Koerner wrote in post #18020993 (external link)
Um, I did post a photo ... lol :rolleyes:

Ah-ha, you noticed!

To answer your question, I can tell the difference blown up in my screen, and printed, YES. Most definitely.

It is only in little 800 px images that the difference isn't very noticeable.

I am pretty sure it's the people with the out-dated, inferior equipment whose panties are in a bunch ... those with top equipment are simply satisfied ;-)a

True, and well said.

In fact, if you go re-read the post with the butterfly, it was taken with a lowly 7D ... but the image is still beautiful, because the subject is simply beautiful.

I agree with your point: We all appreciate beautiful subjects, the tools we choose just help us capture them optimally or sub-optimally, based on our choices.

Certainly, any modern mid-level DSLR, with a decent lens, can capture fine images. No doubt.

Now Pay Attentions here: bw!

It is ALSO "okay" to be a gear freak, and get excited by GEAR :twisted:

It is also okay not to be satisfied with mediocrity, nor to make excuses for it, but to strive for the best you can do, within your budget.

In fact, in case you haven't noticed, we are in the GEAR TALK FORUM, are we not? So don't tell me to "go take some photos," when 1) I already have and 2) I am talking about gear in a gear forum, LMAO

Instead, wake-up and smell the coffee
QUOTED IMAGE

Realize where you are, a Gear Forum, so if you don't like discussing gear then move on over to the images section ...

Cheers and touché

Jack

Hahahahahaa


~Steve~
~ My Website-stevelowephoto.com (external link) ~ Facebook (external link)
Feedback Feedback Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PNPhotography
Senior Member
Avatar
800 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 54
Joined Sep 2007
Location: central PA
Post edited over 3 years ago by PNPhotography. (2 edits in all)
     
May 27, 2016 14:55 |  #65

John Koerner wrote in post #18020353 (external link)
The new DP Review of the Nikon D500 (external link) is in.

Result = Gold Award
"The D500 is the most well-rounded DSLR we've ever tested."

In a nutshell, the D500's image quality is only a hair above the finest ASP-C cameras, but its overall handling, rugged durability, and ability to AF and handle "live action" utterly destroys the competition. Notice I said "the finest," in regards to image quality, which means it's only a hair above the D7200 and Sony a6300 (the 7D II's image quality isn't even in the

Other notable quotes:

  • "Cameras such as the Canon EOS 7D Mark II and Sony's a6300 appear to offer comparable capabilities on paper, but these appearances prove deceptive in real-world use: the D500's autofocus and continuous shooting performance is noticeably better."

  • "Autofocus is the D500's great strength: along with the D5 it's the best we've ever used. Just as mirrorless cameras appear to be closing the gap when it comes to following simple subjects, the D500 comes and blows them (and its DSLR rivals) all out of the water."

  • " ... as an APS-C sports and wildlife camera, the D500 is without rival, and that puts in on the top of our awards podium."


Enjoy,

Jack

DP review still ranks the Nikon d5500's jpegs higher than the D500's-ouch!


6D|7D|7DMKII|Nikon D750|Nikon 85 F1.8|Nikon D5500|G15| Gripped|300F4|35F2IS|8​5 F1.8|135L F2|200L F2.8|17-55 F2.8|70-200L F2.8 MKII|430EX|
https://www.facebook.c​om …2755174446/?ref​=bookmarks (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Koerner
Senior Member
734 posts
Likes: 68
Joined Jun 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
Post edited over 3 years ago by John Koerner.
     
May 27, 2016 18:53 |  #66
bannedPermanent ban

PNPhotography wrote in post #18021011 (external link)
DP review still ranks the Nikon d5500's jpegs higher than the D500's-ouch!

The only "ouch" is that you care about in-camera .jpegs.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PeterAlex7
Member
159 posts
Likes: 40
Joined Dec 2015
     
May 27, 2016 23:16 |  #67

Wow




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
power ­ shot
Member
61 posts
Likes: 25
Joined Dec 2012
Post edited over 3 years ago by power shot.
     
May 28, 2016 01:21 |  #68

The D500 is even out classing the 1DX, talk about "ouch". Never mind that it walks all over the 7D2
With luck Canon's 1DX2 can do something about because should not a $6000 camera fair better than a $2000 camera?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PNPhotography
Senior Member
Avatar
800 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 54
Joined Sep 2007
Location: central PA
     
May 28, 2016 06:07 |  #69

John Koerner wrote in post #18021192 (external link)
The only "ouch" is that you care about in-camera .jpegs.

99% of all sport shooters I know shoot j-pegs. Didn't all your charts and graphs say that somewhere?


6D|7D|7DMKII|Nikon D750|Nikon 85 F1.8|Nikon D5500|G15| Gripped|300F4|35F2IS|8​5 F1.8|135L F2|200L F2.8|17-55 F2.8|70-200L F2.8 MKII|430EX|
https://www.facebook.c​om …2755174446/?ref​=bookmarks (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aladyforty
Goldmember
Avatar
4,168 posts
Gallery: 280 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 6711
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Albany: Western Australia
     
May 28, 2016 08:46 |  #70

Interesting thread, I'm not a tech head. I look at images, I dont care what brand the camera is. This new Nikon is obviously very nice but I wont be stressing over selling up my 7DII 5DIII and 7 L lenses just to move across to a camera that MAY give me a slightly better photo. Meanwhile plenty of photographers are using 7DII to make amazing images.

We have a wildlife photography competition here in Australia through national geographic. Every year the winning images are displayed and travel the country. The prints are always amazing regardless of the camera used. Each photo printed has all the details under the image. Each year many older cameras are in the mix. A couple of years ago the winning image of the year came out of a canon 1DIII and was enlarged to a huge print of about 1 metre X 1 metre. I dont recall a single person who looked at it commenting on the fact that it was taken with a 10 megapixel ageing camera.


Yes the newer cameras will make life easier and maybe we get an image with much more ease but in the end who gives a rats butt what the camera is.

make a choice and stick with it, I doubt that all of a sudden 7DII owners will suddenly be unable to compete with owners of the new Nikon. Actually I see crap photos out of 1DX and Nikon D810, its all about the skill of who is behind the lens


5D3 7D2 Canon G1X Fuji X100 Fuji X10 canon glass & the odd other brands https://500px.com/alad​yforty (external link)
My youtube channel https://www.youtube.co​m …wlc4zg?view_as=​subscriber (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,897 posts
Likes: 427
Joined Jan 2010
     
May 28, 2016 09:53 |  #71

power shot wrote in post #18021501 (external link)
The D500 is even out classing the 1DX, talk about "ouch". Never mind that it walks all over the 7D2
With luck Canon's 1DX2 can do something about because should not a $6000 camera fair better than a $2000 camera?

The D500 might be bad for the 7D2, but it might be very good for the 7D3, forcing Canon to get to work.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
2,897 posts
Likes: 427
Joined Jan 2010
     
May 28, 2016 10:16 |  #72

John Koerner wrote in post #18020687 (external link)
Nikon D500 Advantages:
Slightly higher resolution (albeit negligible);

Actually, less resolution of the subject with the same lens. About 18MP in a 1.6x crop. If it doesn't have an AA filter, then perhaps it has more contrast at the pixel level, but the number of samples is still less.

  • Nikon's ISO stops at 51,200, but extends up to 1,640,000. The 7D II stops at 16,000 and expands to 51,200, which is still D500’s native speed;
  • The top ISO on the dial is not a quality feature, per se. It's just where the manufacturer decided to stop associating their name with high exposure indices. The ISO 3.28M on the D5 is much uglier than the highest ISOs supported officially on most older cameras, so they have lowered the bar. The way that Nikon has chosen to implement their extended high ISOs is pretty bad. They crop the histogram of the highest analog gain ISO and spread it out to cover ~16K RAW values, but at top ISO, this causes a very strong non-linearity in the files because the black frame histogram is wider than the 16K of RAW levels! Once you have clipped the histogram like that, you have lost SNR even if you re-linearize the data. You're much better off shooting a Nikon at 51,200 in RAW and "under-exposing", than using the actual top ISOs officially supported by the camera, if you can tolerate the dark review image.




      
      LOG IN TO REPLY
    John ­ Koerner
    Senior Member
    734 posts
    Likes: 68
    Joined Jun 2011
    Location: San Dimas, CA
         
    May 28, 2016 12:18 |  #73
    bannedPermanent ban

    John Sheehy wrote in post #18021757 (external link)
    The D500 might be bad for the 7D2, but it might be very good for the 7D3, forcing Canon to get to work.

    Agreed.




      
      LOG IN TO REPLY
    gjl711
    According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
    Avatar
    55,371 posts
    Likes: 2363
    Joined Aug 2006
    Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
         
    May 28, 2016 12:24 |  #74

    John Sheehy wrote in post #18021757 (external link)
    The D500 might be bad for the 7D2, but it might be very good for the 7D3, forcing Canon to get to work.

    We have been saying that for the last few years. Canon shows very little regard to what others are doing in the market. They just put out what they can. Also, the 7DIII is probably already done and in test. Maybe they might catch up with the 7D4


    Not sure why, but call me JJ.
    I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
    .
    ::Flickr:: (external link)
    ::Gear::

      
      LOG IN TO REPLY
    John ­ Koerner
    Senior Member
    734 posts
    Likes: 68
    Joined Jun 2011
    Location: San Dimas, CA
    Post edited over 3 years ago by John Koerner. (2 edits in all)
         
    May 28, 2016 12:25 |  #75
    bannedPermanent ban

    aladyforty wrote in post #18021694 (external link)
    Actually I see crap photos out of 1DX and Nikon D810, its all about the skill of who is behind the lens

    Agree with your point, but actually it isn't "all" about the skill of the shooter.

    There are challenging conditions where equipment means the difference.

    You can't take a 4x magnification shot without the equipment to do so.

    I remember one Canon Explorer of Light saying, "Shots like this were not possible," until he got the 1Dx (he was referring to high ISO shots of spirit bears).

    So, yes, equipment does matter, as does photographer skill.

    Again, we are in a GEAR forum.

    If you don't want to discuss gear, then you should probably go to the brand-agnostic IMAGE forums.

    But I am pretty sure were are in the "Camera vs. Camera" section, so comparing the differences in cameras *is* the appropriate topic of discussion here ;-)a

    And when you compare the capabilities of the Nikon D500 to the Canon 7D II, there is no comparison.

    The D500 is The Standard to which all other APS-C cameras now have to aspire.




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

    27,528 views & 66 likes for this thread
    Nikons new D500 vs the Canon 7DII
    FORUMS General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
    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 amdcasin
    826 guests, 240 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.