-= 90D owners unite! Discuss and Post Photos

Martin.D wrote in post #18937764
iso 2000 - SOOC - poor lighting but I'm way more than happy with the images this camera produces..

Hosted photo: posted by Martin.D in
./showthread.php?p=189​37764&i=i30453858
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Martin.D in
./showthread.php?p=189​37764&i=i11355936
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

I don't think my old 7Dii would look anywhere as clean with that iso and a straight conversion to jpg.

Capn Jack wrote in post #18937790
Why would the zoom favor the larger sensor?

Larger entrance pupil when zoomed to 1.6x the focal length. I even made a graph about this; did you see it?

Cropped.

Capn Jack wrote in post #18937792
Alleged laws? Which ones do you find to be alleged laws of physics?

Principles of physics are sometimes alleged to apply to situations when they may not apply.

For example, it is alleged that small pixels or sensors have physics working against them, but reality is much different than that for a variety of uses of a sensor.

Geordie Amanda wrote in post #18937802
I don't think my old 7Dii would look anywhere as clean with that iso and a straight conversion to jpg.

I had a 7D Mark II on loan for a couple of weeks but only really used it with a Sigma 150-600c - Wasn't happy with the image quality hence the 100-400 ii. Shortly after that purchase it was time to hand the 7D II back and pre ordered the 90D.

John Sheehy wrote in post #18937817
Larger entrance pupil when zoomed to 1.6x the focal length. I even made a graph about this; did you see it?

Cropped.

I did see the graph. It really didn't say very much to me. It was a good exercise in making excel graphs, except the x-axis was difficult to read. I really couldn't tell what that graph was supposed to represent.

As other posts have shown, including images, it doesn't matter what the graph might say people get good results, and are happy, with the gear they are using.

John Sheehy wrote in post #18937819
Principles of physics are sometimes alleged to apply to situations when they may not apply.

For example, it is alleged that small pixels or sensors have physics working against them, but reality is much different than that for a variety of uses of a sensor.

It depends on the circumstances. Some of your earlier posts indicated sensor size was important but it was actually pixel size which was the issue.

Brief outing w/ the 90D + 600 III. Not the best light at the moment, overcast and dull, but this is the sort of high contrast environment I want to test this camera out in, to see how the noise and detail holds up.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18937698
.
Which Canon Mark 4 are you talking about?

Do you mean the 1D mark 4 or he 5D Mark 4 ?

.

Hi Tom,

I was referring to the 5D Mark IV.

Ray.Petri wrote in post #18937711
Capn' there is so much to consider that has slipped my mind I am almost afraid to put my 1.4XIII and my 100-400mkII on my 7DII in case it goes into meltdown as I get into it's reach progression zone ...

Just don't let that combo slip past the Event Horizon!!!

Martin.D wrote in post #18937730
Managed to get out this weekend between the showers!

Hosted photo: posted by Martin.D in
./showthread.php?p=189​37730&i=i79593346
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Martin.D in
./showthread.php?p=189​37730&i=i130333693
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Looking great Martin!

mikeivan wrote in post #18937766
In my brief experience, the 90d does not compare with the 7dii for BIF. Initial focus acquisition is painfully slow and more "soft" images result from short bursts than with my 7dii. ...


I thought this example might be helpful for others considering a 90d purchase.

Thanks for this Mike, very helpful info and images!

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18937894
Just don't let that combo slip past the Event Horizon!!!

Is that like letting the streams cross?

Reference to the above comment:
https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=jyaLZHiJJnE

Gull in flight (90D).

Martin.D wrote in post #18937824
I had a 7D Mark II on loan for a couple of weeks but only really used it with a Sigma 150-600c - Wasn't happy with the image quality hence the 100-400 ii. Shortly after that purchase it was time to hand the 7D II back and pre ordered the 90D.

I have a 5Diii as well, but for the snaps I take I use the 7Dii much much more. I guess its AF means I get more 'keepers' and it makes up for my own shortcomings (I love the 3 custom settings-life savers for me quite often, as I have different AF tracking settings etc stored in them-I don't know if you can store them off camera body??).
It's an interesting thing to consider I suppose, the fact I prefer the 7Dii with it's inferior IQ but great AF tracking/fps abilities more than the 5Diii at least in most cases. Shows there is more to cameras than just the sensor

Did photographers get as obsessed with film stock in bygone days, as we seem to get fanatical about sensors today? (I realise it isn't quite that simple but you might see what I' getting at-you have to be careful in this thread )

Btw I bought a Tamron 150-600mm years ago for my 7Dii and used it twice. It lives in it's box, Must get around to part-ex'ing it

Went looking for ducks today and all I found was these gulls. (90D)