tjphoto Posted February 22, 2007 Share #41 Â Posted February 22, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Anne Leibovitz has shot all the Vanity Fair covers with The 1Dsmii for the last couple years. Have you seen the them?.... These cameras are tech marvels. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 22, 2007 Posted February 22, 2007 Hi tjphoto, Take a look here Product Watch: EOS-1D Mark III dSLR. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 22, 2007 Share #42 Â Posted February 22, 2007 Well from a guy that has bought 5 camera's upon hitting the stores first, this time i will sit back and watch from a very long distance. LOL Â Seriously i wish canon well and whatever they bring to market is usally good for the industry as a whole and pushes others further in there devolpment. This camera does sound interesting now that it has 14 bits and we will have to see what that really means when it comes to the image. personally i am staying with leica , it does the job very well for what I want right now and after PMA who knows what i will do on the MF world . But for me and my impressions is you just can't beat the leica glass overall and it will be a cold day in hell to take the M8 out of my hands. Have fun discussing this one , I'll wait till i can see real images before i look again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltoid1 Posted February 22, 2007 Share #43 Â Posted February 22, 2007 My comments in general and in response to some posts here. Â The dustbuster feature is not effective on the Canon 400D. Several online tests have show this. The one on the 1D3 looks to be of the same type. Â As far a 1.3 crop factor being a good balance, it has to do with pixel density, not crop factor. The old 1D2, a 1.3 crop, has the same pixel density as my 5D. I could crop down to 1.3 and get the same 8MP image. Â 14 bit raw is interesting, but I would not be surprised if the the compressed raw file coming off the 16bit ADC in your M8s has better tonality and color depth. Â In the Canon whitepaper, dynamic range of the new camera is said to be about same as the old 1D2. Â I suspect the higher ISO's will have a substantial amount of noise reduction applied, ala the D2X. Â The samples published are unimpressive. The eagle in flight has no fine detail, and there is noise on the white toned neck at ISO 800. Â Â Â "Canon celebrates the 20th anniversary of its top-selling EOS single lens reflex camera system by announcing the EOS-1D Mark III Digital SLR, the world's fastest digital SLR camera"Â Steve's Digicams - Breaking News - Canon 02/21/2007 Press Release Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltoid1 Posted February 22, 2007 Share #44  Posted February 22, 2007 The new 1D3 has a new feature where the user himself can calibrate each lens he uses for best focus.  Edmund, Which lenses were you using? I think in the past my 1Ds, 1Ds2 and 1D2 all have required a focus adjustment at Canon, but they all work perfectly. Some lenses focus faster than others, and for something like a fashion show you really need to keep a single focus point on the eyes of the girls (despite the fact your eyes may be elsewhere), but once you learn to work with the camera it is actually quite good.  This is a photo from the 1D2 - from the time he comes into view from behind a row of bushes, to the time he hits the water, 0.4 seconds elapse. That will tax the focus system of any camera, and many lenses will not focus quickly enough to get get this sort of shot.  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltoid1 Posted February 22, 2007 Share #45  Posted February 22, 2007 Unless the changed the specs, the M8 has a 16bit ADC. So 16 bits get read off the sensor. Then the various conversions are done. If one reads through the Canon whitepaper, Canon makes the point that even their 8bit jpegs will have better quality because they are being created from a 14bit file. Same for the Leica I presume.  It's 14 bit read off the CCD sensor and compressed into 8 bit DNG file and then interpolated into 16-bit TIFFs, or JPEGs when you run it through ACR, Silkypix, C1 whatsever. I've only ordered my camera yesterday but from what I've seen to date ... the M8 files looks good. However, without trying the original 16-bit DNG myself ... I'd always suspect that it can be vastly superior.  What Leica chose to do makes absolutely no sense to me ... no one was expecting the M8 to work like a machine gun, and memory cards are dirt cheap, one can get a 4gb 150x Transcend card for 50 bucks. You've got to wonder what's on top of the heads of their engineering programmers nuts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjphoto Posted February 22, 2007 Share #46 Â Posted February 22, 2007 I have yet to see a shot from the M8 that comes any where near close to that dog shot. From the clean color to drop dead sharpness. No ugly magenta reds in the background green. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted February 22, 2007 Share #47 Â Posted February 22, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Unless the changed the specs. Â They have changed the spec ... and I'm right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted February 22, 2007 Share #48 Â Posted February 22, 2007 Well from a guy that has bought 5 camera's upon hitting the stores first, this time i will sit back and watch from a very long distance. LOL. Â You better do, Guy ... I am not expecting a 500 page Canon bible anytime soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eronald Posted February 22, 2007 Share #49  Posted February 22, 2007 Bill, as I said, I have owned a 1Ds, a 1DsII and a 1DII. Of these ONLY the 1DII was supplying grossly unsharp images, whether in AI servo mode or in one image mode. I am very happy YOU own a 1DII that focuses, I own a 1Ds and a 1DsII that focus fine too.  By the way, on the 1DsII I had some minor focus issues too which Canon could not fix, it turned out in the end that they were due to the protection filter I had on the 85/1.2. I removed the filter and now the camera is super-sharp. The 1Ds did not have this problem.  Edmund  Edmund, Which lenses were you using? I think in the past my 1Ds, 1Ds2 and 1D2 all have required a focus adjustment at Canon, but they all work perfectly. Some lenses focus faster than others, and for something like a fashion show you really need to keep a single focus point on the eyes of the girls (despite the fact your eyes may be elsewhere), but once you learn to work with the camera it is actually quite good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted February 22, 2007 Share #50 Â Posted February 22, 2007 It's not about memory, I don't think, though that's a side bonus. It's about speed. Processing a 16bpp file (like the DMR does) takes a loooonnnggg time. Â Now, I know they could have sped that up, but maybe not without generating a lot more heat, or something equally disastrous in the form factor. Â I absolutely agree with you, Jamie ... and we've already speculated about the possible hardware limitations in the very first 16 bit doubt thread. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJL Posted February 22, 2007 Share #51 Â Posted February 22, 2007 Guys, I did not think that any of this discussion was aimed at trying to convince somebody, anybody that one camera is "better" or "worse" than another. These are completely different tools. One is a high speed DSLR that is pretty much built for brute speed and heavy abuse in the sports trenches and PJ scrums. While folks will use it for many other things, and it is capable there, so what. The other (M8) is a digital rangefinder with a very different purpuse and utility, to a large degree. Yes, either one can try to do the work of the other in its various settings, but why not just use the proper tool for the job. I will be taking my M8 to many of my other sports event shootings, but will be using it for the kinds of shots that are just near impossible to get while shooting the DSLRs. No big deal. They both have their place. They both can turn our spectacular images. They also each have their own strengths and weaknesses. They are just tools. Â I happen to love both, with all the flaws, and find using them a real joy. When I need super sharp images of things in close, the M8 excels. When I need to capture fast moving things at great distances, nothing is going to match the Canon and its long glass. Just the way it is, and nobody should be fretting either way. Â The one critical point I think to take away is that Canon has listened to its users and incorporated some really incredible tech into its latest offering. Personally, I do not think Leica needs to worry about the ergonimics and stuff on the M8, but could do a lot on the firmware front to improve things. And, as any new R camera is being considered, there are now some really cool things to be thinking about that serious users would like. Just some thoughts. Â LJ Â P.S. And I do have to agree with Tim Jones above....no way you get the dog shot without a tool that can really handle all of the changing variables much faster than any human's reflexes, or anything Leica is producing now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltoid1 Posted February 22, 2007 Share #52 Â Posted February 22, 2007 They have changed the spec ... and I'm right. Â Did they pull the 16bit ADC out of the cameras and replace with a 14bit ADC? Â A reference please. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 22, 2007 Share #53 Â Posted February 22, 2007 I have yet to see a shot from the M8 that comes any where near close to that dog shot. From the clean color to drop dead sharpness. No ugly magenta reds in the background green. Â That - superb- dog shot is almost impossible to get with the M8 or any rangefinder camera.Tools for the job. I would not even attempt it. Or rather I would but fail. But. The M8 would have handled the DR of the splashing water better, with the blown out highlight in it. And I don't think there is any doubt left about the colour handling by the M8 with an IR filter on - or even without one in this case with proper C1 profiles, as I presume the dog is not made of synthetic material. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjphoto Posted February 22, 2007 Share #54 Â Posted February 22, 2007 If you could see the dogs eyes, that shot would be worth a fortune. I would work it till i got it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 22, 2007 Share #55 Â Posted February 22, 2007 I agree - but the eyes on these dogs are seen but rarely Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjphoto Posted February 22, 2007 Share #56 Â Posted February 22, 2007 How would "DR" have made that shot any better? Does the the end viewer really care about that. Or is it just a justification? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjphoto Posted February 22, 2007 Share #57 Â Posted February 22, 2007 Is "DR" another word for photo geek? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted February 22, 2007 Share #58 Â Posted February 22, 2007 Wow, this new announcement is really creating a buzz. Good for Canon! I, however, am very happy with the 5D, and even happier with the Leica M8 -- as someone who does photography simply for the joy of it. I think it was Guy who said that 10 fps is great for sports photographers, I agree. I would have no use for such an option although I think it is a healthy thing that Canon pushes the industry for the pros out there who really need the stuff. The image quality of the M8 continues to blow me away. I seriously doubt that this new Canon camera can beat it, perhaps only in the noise department. Â Cheers, Wilfredo+ Benitez-Rivera Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddp Posted February 22, 2007 Share #59 Â Posted February 22, 2007 DR, IQ....yada yada....internet terms of the minute...lol Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted February 22, 2007 Share #60 Â Posted February 22, 2007 Did they pull the 16bit ADC out of the cameras and replace with a 14bit ADC? Â A reference please. Â There have been repetitve discussions on this site and elsewhere ... also LFI magazine has feature articles on this matter ... it's not a story about pull out and replacement. I believe 16-bit ADC only existed in its conceptual design and never happened physically. Â Some friend on this board who actually knows what's behind the scene has mentioned that Leica did build a 16 bit prototype camera but the output is simply a memory dump and Leica had some special utility to consctruct a RAW image from that in the lab. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.