Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
It's Official: The D7100 Destroys The 70D  
User currently offlineclickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9601 posts, RR: 69
Posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6689 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...areil2%29/865|0/%28brand2%29/Nikon

I have noticed any many of the articles I have read re: 70D that the improvements have come to "Live View" (or whatever Canon calls it) and Video, but that the new technology is of no use to someone who shoots down the view finder.

59 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6678 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Nikon be kicking butt right now, converting former Canon shooters along the way.


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6563 times:

Quoting clickhappy (Thread starter):
but that the new technology is of no use to someone who shoots down the view finder.

Quite true - don't think anyone, including Canon, claimed otherwise. Essentially its a 7D with an enhanced video capability. May be of no significance to some, but exactly the same could be said of the 5D2 which as a stills camera offered little over the 5D, yet became one of the hottest properties of the time - arguably revolutionary - for film makers.

Of course in the real world, this is an important development. Like it or not, many who shoot professionally are being asked to supply video as well as stills - I've ordered one for this reason (and to provide a 1.6 crop alternative/backup to my 5D3).

Sensor wise, it would seem that Nikon are king of the hill at the moment. But Canon are known to have a range of very high res sensors under field test (in the 40mp+ range). These must be all new in design, so we may find (as is ever the case) that the tables will turn again.

I feel that when claims are made for one make being the "best", there is a sense that other are inadequate. Of course that's not the case. I don't think there's a single production DSLR across all makes which is not "good enough" for 99% of applications. When pixel peeped at 100% you may see differences in the original files, you would generally be very hard pushed to notice the difference in a processed jpg or print except in extreme cases (super high ISO).

Remember, there is a large industry which makes its money largely by trying to make people dissatisfied with what they already own and have been using happily for years.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12033 posts, RR: 47
Reply 3, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6517 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ckw (Reply 2):
Remember, there is a large industry which makes its money largely by trying to make people dissatisfied with what they already own and have been using happily for years.

True. Maybe we should be grateful that Apple don't currently make an iCam.   



Hey AA, the 1960s called. They want their planes back!
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 6493 times:

No Nikon destroys a Canon when one has £4,000 worth of Canon lenses.....  

Nikon bodies have been better for a while now but I doubt Canon will sit back and get left behind. At one time it was the other way round - and likely still is in the lens department. Nikon shooters still don't have a true equivalent of Canon's amazing 70-200 f/4.

The two will always jostle for the number one spot, and customers will always be left with a difficult choice between the two. I tried Nikon once I'd decided to go digital (in 2004) and didn't like the system at all. A few weeks ago I had a play around with a Nikon D3100, and didn't like that either.

The sooner people get of the 'one is better than the other' banter bus the sooner those new to the hobby can start making more sensible decisions based on their own conclusions.

Karl


User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6486 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4):
No Nikon destroys a Canon when one has £4,000 worth of Canon lenses.....

Being heavily invested in Canon lenses didn't stop three of my friends from switching. Resale value still allows one to make the switch without takng a much of a hit.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4):
Nikon shooters still don't have a true equivalent of Canon's amazing 70-200 f/4.

Canon shooters don't have the equivalent of Nikon's 14-24 f/2.8, the crown jewel of landscape lenses.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4):
The sooner people get of the 'one is better than the other' banter bus the sooner those new to the hobby can start making more sensible decisions based on their own conclusions.


The only people I see up in arms over one is better than the other as bragging rights are defensive Canon shooters.  

People are finding one to be better than the other according to their own conclusions and needs. Colin is right. Just because one has the edge over the other right now doesn't mean the other is inadequate. But right now, especially for landscape photographers, who I think make up the majority of hobbist/pro-sumer photographers, Nikon offers the better option based on specs very important to landscape photography. It's not really about bragging rights.

But at the end of the day, especially for aviation photography, any modern DSLR will do the job regardless of brand.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineclickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9601 posts, RR: 69
Reply 6, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6468 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4):
Nikon shooters still don't have a true equivalent of Canon's amazing 70-200 f/4.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70-200mm-f4.htm

I prefer a 2.8, but there has been a /4 option for a year.


User currently offlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2518 posts, RR: 17
Reply 7, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6444 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ckw (Reply 2):
but exactly the same could be said of the 5D2 which as a stills camera offered little over the 5D

I don't think so...it nearly doubled the resolution. While megapixels alone are sometimes simply a gimmick it made a huge difference in how much you can crop from he 5D2. The quality and noise was virtually identical as on the 5D1

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4):
Nikon shooters still don't have a true equivalent of Canon's amazing 70-200 f/4.

Or the 100-400 . The 200-400 is nice but extremely expensive


User currently offlineseahawk From Germany, joined May 2005, 578 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 6441 times:

Have you seen the laughable buffer of the D7100? This camera destroys nothing. We Nikon shooter envy the Canon shooters for the 70D and more so for the 7dII.

User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6436 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 7):
I don't think so...it nearly doubled the resolution.

Well yes, and that is a plus if you want to crop - but IMHO image quality wasn't quite as good as the original 5d at base ISO. I don't think that was the big driver to upgrade though. It was the filmmakers that made it difficult to get your hands on one when it was released.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6437 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 5):
The only people I see up in arms over one is better than the other as bragging rights are defensive Canon shooters

I'm a Canon shooter - but Canon gear is getting me exactly the shots I want. Is that not what it's all about? If Nikon was so much better for what I need I'd ditch Canon and invest in Nikon. Spending money on a Nikon isn't going to get me a shot of a Druk Air 319 - but investing that money wisely in a trip to Bhutan will.

Horses for courses. People tend to delve far too deeply into the finer details when all that really matters is how the thing performs in your particular field. These online reviews/comparisons are of little value as there are way too many parameters involved. If it gets the shot you want, who cares if it's badged Canon or Nikon? Go shoot with it; if you like it, keep it.

If you're a crap photographer, neither brand is going to help; on the flip side, if you're a good photographer, either brand will get you the stunning images you want.

This whole 'N vs. C' thing gets silly at times.

Karl


User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6426 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 10):
I'm a Canon shooter

I know you are, and you're coming off as defensive.   Because...

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 10):
If Nikon was so much better for what I need I'd ditch Canon and invest in Nikon.
THIS is exactly what is happening for a lot of photographers out there. This isn't such a macho game as you think it is, Karl. Right now, Nikon sells gear that better suits some photographers. It's ok!

I'm a Canon shooter, too, and I don't feel the personal need to switch. But I'm ok saying Nikon has an edge right now.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 6387 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 11):
But I'm ok saying Nikon has an edge right now

Because, where bodies are concerned, it undoubtedly does. Doesn't make my 50D feel inferior though.

If I was doing landscape I would probably notice the differences, but in aviation I think it's far too slight.

I'm comfortable with my gear. There'll always be better out there (lots of Canon stuff is better than what I currently have) but it doesn't make me feel inferior and cause me to go on the defensive.

I'm in no way getting defensive - I'm simply pointing out that this whole 'C vs. N' argument is futile and proves nothing conclusively. Is anyone really bothered that someone else might have a better camera than them? Does it matter? Will a new Nikon make me a better photographer? No on three counts me-thinks.

Karl


User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 13, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6358 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 12):
Because, where bodies are concerned, it undoubtedly does. Doesn't make my 50D feel inferior though.

Who says it does??


Quoting JakTrax (Reply 12):
If I was doing landscape I would probably notice the differences, but in aviation I think it's far too slight.

Agreed. It's less of a concern for someone only interested in photographing airplanes.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 12):
I'm comfortable with my gear.

Good for you. I'm content with my Canon gear as well.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 12):
There'll always be better out there (lots of Canon stuff is better than what I currently have) but it doesn't make me feel inferior and cause me to go on the defensive.

Then why do you keep going on the defensive by reiterating this "inferior" nonsense?

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 12):
I'm simply pointing out that this whole 'C vs. N' argument is futile and proves nothing conclusively.

What should it prove? All that is being said is Nikon's latest releases are currently more attractive to many photographers.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 12):
Is anyone really bothered that someone else might have a better camera than them?

I'm not. Not sure how that applies here.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 12):
Does it matter?

No.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 12):
Will a new Nikon make me a better photographer?

Who has claimed that your gear determines your ability as a photographer?

[Edited 2013-08-29 12:38:49]


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 6278 times:

I would be saying the same if the title read, "Canon 100D destroys Nikon D3100". It's misleading for anyone not entirely clued up on what's what.

User currently offlinegranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 15, posted (7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6238 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hello

I may be ordering a 70D soon but that review does not put me off.
I'm not keen on the green cast.

Regards

Gary Watt - Granite
Airliners.net Head Screener
www.airliners.net
http://twitter.com/airliners_net


User currently offlineclickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9601 posts, RR: 69
Reply 16, posted (7 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 6221 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 7):
Or the 100-400

The 100-400 is an ancient, dust-pumper design. Try this on:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/80-400mm.htm


User currently offlineGuitrThree From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2031 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 6203 times:

Full disclosure. Yes, Canon user.

That being said, is it just me, or it this whole thread about N being better than C based on the fact (or opinion, your call) that a review claimed that the middle of the pack Crop D7100 is better than the middle of the pack Crop 70d?

Last time I checked, the Canon 1DX kicks the s*** out of everything.

Buy and shoot what you want. That's what I say.



As Seen On FlightRadar24! Radar ==> F-KBNA5
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 18, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 6193 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 17):

This thread started that way, and I suspect the OP was doing a little trolling in which case he has succeeded in getting some riled up.

But the point subsequently made is that Nikon overall is releasing new camera bodies that are out scoring the equivalent Canon releases and thus attracting many to the Nikon system. It's not a big deal and not really a point that needs to be obsessed about.

But I also agree with your 1Dx assessment.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 19, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6181 times:

There is another headline that could be used with the DXO review:

"The highest rated APS-C sensor from Canon"

So, if you're a Canon user, you shouldn't be disappointed.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (7 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6114 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 18):
he has succeeded in getting some riled up

I don't see anyone getting riled up. Nikon produces better bodies generally at the minute - that's fact - what's there to get riled up about?

As long as everyone's getting the images they desire it's irrelevant. What I'm saying is that these online reviews are not 100% reliable, and even when they are the test conditions never include aviation. I like to test a camera personally before I go making assumptions. Had I listened to the bad stuff said about the 50D in the beginning I'd likely have missed out on the second-best camera I've ever owned (and I've owned a few)!

Nikon will work for some, Canon for others.

Karl


User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1056 posts, RR: 34
Reply 21, posted (7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 6034 times:

Maybe i should put up a post 1Dx slaughters poor old Nikon D4 which suffers from poor AF,poor QC and heavy glass which gets murdered by its big white super sharp and 30% lighter competition..
Then we could start a real slanging match about real cameras and real lenses...
Or we could compare the 200-400 with the now what appears very shabby Nikon competition by comparison.
But hey what fun is that showing Canon now make zooms with built in TC's sharper than Nikon can make a prime..


http://photographylife.com/nikon-dslr-autofocus-problems

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/42435489



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlinemegatop412 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 308 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5905 times:

What a ridiculous, self-righteous thread title. The D7100 does not 'destroy' what looks to be a very nice Canon body. And I say that as a Nikon shooter.

User currently offlinetrvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1369 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (7 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5837 times:

I have both N and C, I use a 50D (2nd hand) for aviation and D7000 for everything else. Picturewise, i like the Nikon better but body and handling, I like the Canon more. Also, there is no 70-200f4L equivalent for under $600 in Nikon line up which I enjoy with my 50D.

User currently offlineReffado From Brazil, joined Feb 2012, 218 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 5774 times:

Honestly, there is a hype over new releases that I can't understand. Sure, if you need or feel you have to change or upgrade, go ahead. But I have been using my D7000 since it came out (what, two years ago?) and it's just fine. I mean, sure the D7100 or the 70D may be better, but not enough has changed to justify a system switch or even an eventual upgrade, IMHO.

User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 25, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 5738 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Reffado (Reply 24):

Honestly, there is a hype over new releases that I can't understand. Sure, if you need or feel you have to change or upgrade, go ahead. But I have been using my D7000 since it came out (what, two years ago?) and it's just fine. I mean, sure the D7100 or the 70D may be better, but not enough has changed to justify a system switch or even an eventual upgrade, IMHO.


The hype is coming from landscape photographers who over the last 12 months have seen new releases from Nikon that have insane dynamic range and high ISO capabilities allowing them to tweak and manipulate one shot when before they needed multiple exposures and fusion/tone mapping to do the same thing.

Obviously less relevant to aviation photographers which is why most here don't agree with or see the big deal.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 26, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5700 times:

That's the thing - very few people take an overall view of the product, they look at it from a perspective of how they will use it, and since they're not official reviewers, why should they take a broader perspective. It's their photos, their tool and of course their money.

The danger is that when these biased perspectives get out on the 'net, they tend to be taken as gospel as an overall rating of the camera. Look at the D800 - I am amazed by the shadow detail you can pull from that sensor - and yes, I would like to be able to do that with my 5D. But that's only part of the package. The D800 has its weak points as well.

As a photographer, all you can do us look at the reviews from a variety of sources and try and piece together the whole picture to find the camera that's best for you. And of course that is only part of the equation. In many cases its the lenses that take priority, and, if you want a certain lens this may dictate the body you buy.

As far as the 70D is concerned, film makers will happily trade off less competitive specs in order to get the new AF system. That's potentially game changing as opposed to an incremental improvement in image quality (which, quite frankly, very few clients will even notice).

Of course the very fact that Nikon, Canon and others appear to be pursuing different strategies in camera development suggests that no one is sure what is most important. All are gambling to some extent that their route will prove the most desirable,

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlinetrvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1369 posts, RR: 10
Reply 27, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5703 times:

One thing I don't get is most serious shooters preferring a good crop DSLR want a D400 or a 7DMKII, but these guys keep putting out half cooked bodies like 70D or D7100.

User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5682 times:

Quoting trvyyz (Reply 27):
One thing I don't get is most serious shooters preferring a good crop DSLR want a D400 or a 7DMKII, but these guys keep putting out half cooked bodies like 70D or D7100.

That makes two of us. Canon has saturated the ≤$1000 market with everything from Rebels to xxD bodies and now mirrorless.

The 7D has been around for 4+ years now. The only other camera in Canon DSLR history to have been around that long without a replacement was the 1Ds MkIII.

In my opinion, investing in sensor manufacturing really set Canon back. They've painted themselves into a corner with the 500nm because changing to a smaller process is insanely expensive and time-consuming, especially for a company who's business is imaging, not semiconductor fabricating. Nikon may have had its share of problems with the newer releases, but at least their sensor hardware remains on the bleeding edge because production is left to firms that specialise in semiconductor manufacturing and manage to keep up with tech trends.

All that said, I'm in the market for a camera with better AF, ISO performance and resolution than my 50D and the 70D certainly ticks those boxes. And the last time Canon waited more than 4 years to update a product, they released the 1D X, so maybe the 7D MkII will be something equally special?

PS: The OP is not really making any sort of useful point - the 70D and D7100 are in different segments. Canon's 7D competes with the D7100, so that's closer to an apples-to-apples comparison. Maybe wait a few months for the 7D successor?

Cheers
Angad


User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 29, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5679 times:

Quoting angad84 (Reply 28):
ISO performance

I'll wait and see for myself rather than swallow Canon's marketing claims. 20+ megapixels on a 1.6x FOVCF body is an awful lot and I'd be surprised if noise performance didn't take a hit (look at the 7D's excessive noise issue - easily overcome but still...).

Nikon seems to offer better ISO performance all-round at the moment, from the budget bodies all the way through to the near-top.

Karl


User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 30, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 5656 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ckw (Reply 26):
That's the thing - very few people take an overall view of the product, they look at it from a perspective of how they will use it, and since they're not official reviewers, why should they take a broader perspective. It's their photos, their tool and of course their money.

This is true. However, there is always a trade off when looking into camera bodies. Image quality is most important to some, features are more important to others.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 29):
20+ megapixels on a 1.6x FOVCF body is an awful lot and I'd be surprised if noise performance didn't take a hit (look at the 7D's excessive noise issue - easily overcome but still...).

Things have come a long way in the past 4 years since the 7D was released so we will see.

[Edited 2013-09-04 10:35:25]


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 31, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5639 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 30):
Things have come a long way in the past 4 years since the 7D was released so we will see

I really hope Canon have injected innovation into their latest sensors but they've been pretty stagnant in that department for a few years now. I'm looking at the 70D with envious eyes but my 50D still does a fantastic job and so the former will have to be a significant improvement before I part with any cash. The price fix at £1079 for the 70D is a little off-putting when the 7D is the same price and the 6D only a couple of hundred more.

Karl


User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5624 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 29):
I'll wait and see for myself rather than swallow Canon's marketing claims

Going by DXO's testing, which is usually objective, it has a significant edge over the 50D, especially if one compares them at similar resolutions (ie: 70D downsampled to 15.1 MP).

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 29):
Nikon seems to offer better ISO performance all-round at the moment

Yep.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 31):
I really hope Canon have injected innovation into their latest sensors

They've announced no new sensor tech developments, nor have the rumour mills. So unless they manage to yank the proverbial rabbit out of a hat...

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 31):
The price fix at £1079 for the 70D is a little off-putting when the 7D is the same price

And that's pretty much the only reason I've held off buying and am waiting for the 7D MkII. At least then I will be able to compare two current-gen products side-by side and make a decision.

Cheers
Angad


User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 33, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 5620 times:

Quoting angad84 (Reply 32):
Going by DXO's testing, which is usually objective, it has a significant edge over the 50D, especially if one compares them at similar resolutions (ie: 70D downsampled to 15.1 MP)

Yes, but DXO's testing isn't my testing.  

It's irrelevant who the product pleases if it doesn't please me. That's why I always consider the only true test to be the one I conduct myself. Online reviews/charts/opinions I only ever take as a (very rough) guide.

Personally I think there's an over-reliance on facts and figures - all of which I think are irrelevant if the body doesn't do exactly what I want it to do. Don't forget that any image quality test also requires a lens - which means that the results are usually at best ambiguous.

My approach may be cynical but the 70D isn't even available to buy yet, which means at the moment my 50D is the clear winner.

Let's see what happens when the thing is released and enters mainstream circulation. Hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised......

Karl


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 34, posted (7 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 5617 times:

Quoting angad84 (Reply 28):
In my opinion, investing in sensor manufacturing really set Canon back. They've painted themselves into a corner with the 500nm because changing to a smaller process is insanely expensive and time-consuming, especially for a company who's business is imaging, not semiconductor fabricating.

I'd say quite the opposite - investing in sensor fabrication (and effectively inventing a usable CMOS sensor) is what gave Canon a massive edge over its competitors for years.

Have they rested on their laurals recently? Perhaps. But it would be foolish to think that Canon didn't have something in the pipeline ... fact: Canon has 40+mp sensors field testing. These may be new technology. Fact: Canon has patents for a Foveon type sensor, Fact: Canon are seriously looking at medium format.

But ultimately, economics will rule when it comes to releasing new technology. Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean it's a viable marketing proposition at the moment. BTW I'm sure other companies have equally interesting products in development. But there is huge uncertainty where the market will go. Remember, top end DSLRs are only a small share of the camera market.

I'm not expecting much from the 7D II - what more can they do with it? It will have the new dual pixel focusing sensor, but, in terms of quality, surely we are reaching the point of diminishing returns without a fundamental change in technology, but I don't think we'll see this in the 7Dii. And of course they need to keep some decent differential between it and the 1Dx.

From a practical point of view, pretty much all recent cameras are capable of producing images of a similar quality - the biggest leaps in improvement have been in the mirrorless sector, which are now very close - in some cases better - than APS-C DSLRs which suggests that the current sensor technology is reaching physical limits.

Significant improvements will probably only result in adopting a non-Bayer type sensor (like Foveon) or introducing a larger sensor (as per the Leica S). Of course the latter approach would mean new lenses.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 35, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5609 times:

Quoting ckw (Reply 34):
I'd say quite the opposite - investing in sensor fabrication (and effectively inventing a usable CMOS sensor) is what gave Canon a massive edge over its competitors for years.

Have they rested on their laurals recently? Perhaps

Exactly the way I look at it. Perhaps 'resting on laurels' is just a cover for a new technology development? After all, if you're still commanding a decent market share why rush to alter your technology in tiny increments (which appears to me to be what Nikon has chosen to do) when you can make leaps and bounds every four or five years? Not at all saying this is the case but I imagine Canon will not hand the market to anyone else on a plate.

Ultimately, however you develop new technology and whenever you choose to release it (whether it be a gradual but constant process or one involving huge advancements but only periodically) the big two I think will always end up level-pegging. They keep each other on their toes and I reckon if Canon and Nikon weren't so close in terms of technologies and market share we'd see a lot less progress and higher prices.

Quoting ckw (Reply 34):
in terms of quality, surely we are reaching the point of diminishing returns without a fundamental change in technology

I look back at previous cameras I've owned and much of the time I begin to think that we reached a pinnacle of image quality on a per-pixel basis a long time ago. Perhaps it's just me but I think we were actually squeezing far more out of 8-10mp bodies a couple of years back than we are now, pixel for pixel (high-end bodies aside). Sure, we get more detail and generally better IQ, etc. today but are we really getting better images overall?

Karl


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 36, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5598 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 35):
Sure, we get more detail and generally better IQ, etc. today but are we really getting better images overall?

Probably not - as it ever was, the real limit is the photographer.

Plus whatever the bench test results, these are a long way from what is achieved in the real world .... are you using the best lenses? Optimum aperture? A truly solid tripod? Much of the time this is either impractical or impossible, so you are immediately losing some of the theoretical resolution or sharpness.

And of course current sensors are reaching the limits of the resolving power of the lenses - I doubt many of the kit lenses are capable of getting the best out of the better sensors these days. So while an increase in megapixels might result in larger images, you won't see any more detail unless you've got the best lenses.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5560 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 33):
Yes, but DXO's testing isn't my testing.

Ok, but short of buying/renting and testing oneself, surely sites like DXO/DPReview etc provide a good way to judge products before buying?

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 33):
Don't forget that any image quality test also requires a lens - which means that the results are usually at best ambiguous.

Um, no. DR, ISO performance, color depth (the three main DXO criteria) are not lens-dependent. And things like sharpness* and contrast are lens dependent, which means they don't (or shouldn't) figure into camera body testing.

* yes, OLPF affects sharpness as well.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 33):
but the 70D isn't even available to buy yet

It is where I live :p

Quoting ckw (Reply 34):
I'd say quite the opposite - investing in sensor fabrication (and effectively inventing a usable CMOS sensor) is what gave Canon a massive edge over its competitors for years.

Nope. It was an edge for, at the most, five years. But it has dragged them back on the hardware side for the next five years, forcing them to squeeze the juice out of a fab process that has been around twice as long as is optimal. The only upside to this is that their fab costs are probably miniscule, because they must by now have fantastic ROI on their ancient chips.

Moore's Law has held up since it was first posited, and while CMOS imaging sensors are not expected to be on the bleeding edge, it's worth nothing that all of Canon's sensors are manufactured on the 500nm process, which is twenty two times larger than the leading edge of consumer computing (Intel 22nm). Sony, which makes a bunch of Nikon sensors, is at 180nm. A smaller process node allows for higher resolution, lower power consumption and better control over current leakage, which affects noise/SnR and so on.

FWIW, Canon does have a smaller process - 250nm or 180nm if I recall correctly - but for whatever reason (probably poor yields) have not used it for DSLR sensors. On the one hand, this gives me hope for the 7D MkII, because if it is indeed a yield issue that is holding back Canon's transition, then the first step in upscaling the sensors will be APS-C. If Canon can move ADC to the sensor, a la Nikon, then we'll have something really awesome.

Quoting ckw (Reply 34):
fact: Canon has 40+mp sensors field testing

See comment about yields. Testing a sensor is nice and all, but if they can't make money producing it... You said it yourself:

Quoting ckw (Reply 34):
But ultimately, economics will rule when it comes to releasing new technology. Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean it's a viable marketing proposition at the moment.
Quoting ckw (Reply 34):
suggests that the current sensor technology is reaching physical limits.

While I disagree with this, at least in terms of the next 5+ years (a lifetime in semiconductor terms!), I certainly agree that

Quoting ckw (Reply 34):
Significant improvements will probably only result in adopting a non-Bayer type sensor (like Foveon)

Canon is exploring Foveon-type sensors, according to CR (which tends to be right about this stuff).

Quoting ckw (Reply 36):
Much of the time this is either impractical or impossible, so you are immediately losing some of the theoretical resolution or sharpness

Sure, but it's nicer to lose 1 muffin off a tray of hundreds than lose one off a tray of just a dozen. Over deliver with tech to make up for losses in the field.

Oh god, I just realised how much I've typed, I really shouldn't do this at work.

Cheers
Angad


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 38, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5553 times:

Quoting angad84 (Reply 37):
Over deliver with tech to make up for losses in the field.

Yes - but someone has to pay for that tech (ie. you and me!) Take the case of the 1Dx - more than 2x the cost of the 5D3. Will it take 2x as good pics? No. Is that 2x premium worth it for slightly better fame rate, AF, and (arguably IQ)? For some, yes, but from the manufacturers point of view we're looking at diminishing returns, which of course pushes the premium price even higher. Viscous circle.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5545 times:

Quoting ckw (Reply 38):
Will it take 2x as good pics? No. Is that 2x premium worth it for slightly better fame rate, AF, and (arguably IQ)? For

If the market supports it, it will be produced. If not, it won't.

Cheers
Angad


User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 40, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5523 times:

Quoting angad84 (Reply 37):
Um, no. DR, ISO performance, color depth (the three main DXO criteria) are not lens-dependent. And things like sharpness* and contrast are lens dependent, which means they don't (or shouldn't) figure into camera body testing

Um, yes, because without a lens you don't get an image. It's no good having a wonderful camera if the lenses you have can't make the most of the resolution. Everything is ultimately lens dependent; if it weren't we'd all be buying 18-55 kit lenses with our 1Ds.

As Colin points out, most of the time it's either impractical or impossible to get test figures out of a camera in the real world. So as I said, there is still an over-reliance on facts and figures published on the internet. I may not be the world's most technical person when it comes to the inner workings of a DSLR but I certainly have the experience 'out in the field'.

You can argue technicalities with me all day if you wish but for me my own testing is the only proof of whether a camera's going to do exactly what I want it to. Since most cameras now produce images of a very similar overall quality a lot of photographers base their choice on other things, such as how easy it is to change a variety of settings in-camera quickly between shots. Image quality is quite irrelevant if your camera causes you to miss the shot!

Karl


User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 41, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5510 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 40):
You can argue technicalities with me all day if you wish but for me my own testing is the only proof of whether a camera's going to do exactly what I want it to

Then I'm not sure what the point of this discussion is. This thread is, by its very nature, a discussion about third-party testing.

Cheers
Angad


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 42, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5506 times:

And 3rd party testing has a value. But I would no more buy a camera based on the DXo rating of its sensor than I would buy a car based purely on the performance specs of its engine. This is important data, but as Karl suggests, its only part of the picture.

Although I am a Canon person, I also happily use Olympus. I will never buy Nikon (regardless of how good their sensors are) as the handling does not suit me at all. Don't know why, and its probably my fault. But there it is - I will only use a camera I'm comfortable using as that is the starting point for good photography.

And just to show I'm not bias, (and this is going back some time) I'm one of the few owners who absolutely hated the legendary Canon A1 - the technological marvel of its time, On paper, brilliant, but I just couldn't get on with it.

The best camera should feel like an extension of yourself, one that you can shoot without thinking about all those controls and settings. Its an individual thing, and may take some time to find the one that works for you.

Benchmarks certainly help to identify contenders, but they alone are unlikely to show the best camera fro you.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 43, posted (7 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 5506 times:

Quoting angad84 (Reply 41):
This thread is, by its very nature, a discussion about third-party testing

This is very true. Statistics can be helpful as a guide but they very often discount other factors necessary to emulate real-world situations. A clear example of this is when we hear about '1.3 out of 10 people.....' - no doubt theoretically correct but have you ever met 'a third of a person'?

Hypothetically a camera body may reproduce this and that colour perfectly and resolve 'x' amount of detail but without taking into consideration the real-world factor that is the lens (along with numerous other factors) such tests can be misleading.

My point is that the proof is ultimately in the final photograph, not the camera's specifications. You don't need the best camera on the market to always get the best photo. The right tool for the job isn't always the one that impresses most on paper.

Karl


User currently offlinedarreno1 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 224 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (7 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5446 times:

Sure, specs are not everything, but if I'm going to shell out for a body, I'm going to get the most for my money. I'm also going to consider my options down the line and future proof as much as my budget would allow. The last thing you need is to splurge on that nice lens only to realize the body can't take full advantage of it.


Nikon D7000 / Nikkor 105mm AF f2.8 / Nikkor 35 f1.8G / Nikkor 50 f1.8D / Nikkor 85mm / Nikkor 300mm f4 AF
User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (7 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5402 times:

Quoting ckw (Reply 42):
But I would no more buy a camera based on the DXo rating

Of course not, or we'd all be running around with D800s! 
Quoting ckw (Reply 42):
I will never buy Nikon (regardless of how good their sensors are) as the handling does not suit me at all

While I wouldn't go so far as to say "never", I am with you on this. When I was getting started, about five years ago now, I went camera shopping and was initially set on getting Nikon (that's the danger of reading too many reviews!) but the second I curled my palm around a 50D on display, I knew I had to have it.

Cheers
Angad


User currently onlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9395 posts, RR: 27
Reply 46, posted (7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 5385 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting darreno1 (Reply 44):
The last thing you need is to splurge on that nice lens only to realize the body can't take full advantage of it.

In general, I'd be more worried about the reverse. When I had my cheap Rebel XS body, getting high-quality lenses made a world of difference, even with a 10 MP sensor in Canon's cheapest DSLR. The Rebel XS + 17-40 L is still the sharpest body/lens combo I've shot with.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 43):
A clear example of this is when we hear about '1.3 out of 10 people.....' - no doubt theoretically correct but have you ever met 'a third of a person'?

It's just an easier way to quickly understand the ratio. More easily grasped than, say, 752 out of 5787 people.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinedarreno1 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 224 posts, RR: 0
Reply 47, posted (7 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5341 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 46):
In general, I'd be more worried about the reverse. When I had my cheap Rebel XS body, getting high-quality lenses made a world of difference, even with a 10 MP sensor in Canon's cheapest DSLR. The Rebel XS + 17-40 L is still the sharpest body/lens combo I've shot with.

I went from a D40 to D3100 to a D7000 and I can't say I've ever run into sharpness or quality issues on properly focused shots. Plus the higher end bodies allow for autofocus fine-tuning. Every lens I've put on the D7000 so far have produced tack sharp images.

I have no experience with Canon so can't speculate on what your problem might have been.



Nikon D7000 / Nikkor 105mm AF f2.8 / Nikkor 35 f1.8G / Nikkor 50 f1.8D / Nikkor 85mm / Nikkor 300mm f4 AF
User currently onlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9395 posts, RR: 27
Reply 48, posted (7 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5342 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting darreno1 (Reply 47):

I have no experience with Canon so can't speculate on what your problem might have been.

I didn't have a problem. Cheap lenses produced decent results. Expensive lenses produced great results.

My only point was that I've never been concerned about my camera bodies. More concerned about lens quality.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineclickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9601 posts, RR: 69
Reply 49, posted (7 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5203 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting seahawk (Reply 8):
Have you seen the laughable buffer of the D7100?

With a fast card, the D7100 has the same buffer capability as the 70D.

Still laughing?


User currently onlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 50, posted (7 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5182 times:

Quoting clickhappy (Reply 49):
Still laughing?

Yes, because it really doesn't matter. What next for this thread? "My dad can beat up your dad......"

It's clear to me that both the D7100 and 70D are excellent cameras in their own respects. Once a decent lens is attached to either I doubt one will 'destroy' the other.

Karl


User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 638 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (7 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5157 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 48):
More concerned about lens quality.

Yep. As long as your lens outresolves your sensor, you're golden.

Cheers
Angad


User currently offlinegunone From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (7 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5173 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I own one of these and a D7000, now my backup camera. I purchased it for two reasons. 1. The number of pixels I can get using FX format. 2. consistency in tack sharp focus. I shut every other attribute off, that's what Photoshop is for.

The down side of this camera. If you do not use Nikon Pro series lenses the sensor will amplify every weakness of your consumer lenses. The bottom line, be prepared to spend $4000.0 for a wide angle and telephoto zoom, this camera does not tolerate off brand or kit lenses.

If results that amaze are your objective spend the money, your first days shoot will have you throwing away all your old photos, the pictures I take, amaze me. The wife no longer asks: do you really need that? Now she want's to know when it is going to arrive.

Good luck with your endeavor.


User currently offlineDehowie From Australia, joined Feb 2004, 1056 posts, RR: 34
Reply 53, posted (7 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 5106 times:

Mmm not many black lenses here..lol..

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/201...-Womens-Final.html?ref=tennis&_r=0

Guess that DR advantage doesnt mean much compared to light lenses and accurate AF..



2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 54, posted (7 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 5091 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dehowie (Reply 53):

Guess that DR advantage doesnt mean much compared to light lenses and accurate AF..

Uhhhhhhh, yeah. DR advantage is basically irrelevant to sports photography.

Light lenses and accurate AF doesn't mean much when on a tripod using manual focus.

[Edited 2013-09-09 17:34:54]


ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineclickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9601 posts, RR: 69
Reply 55, posted (7 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 5095 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Plenty of black lenses in that photo.

Are you the Canon shooter with the teal shirt and camo bucket hat (looks like he has both!)?

[Edited 2013-09-09 17:10:16]

User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1736 posts, RR: 11
Reply 56, posted (7 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 5027 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I'll just keep trucking over here with the a99 and the 70-400.   


From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineharlequin67 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (7 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4767 times:

My view on this whole NvC debate is this, Nikon produce some of the finest bodies I have seen. They feel great when handled, well built.

On the Canon side the lenses are better than Nikons. The Nikon 80-400 old model used to be a poor relation to the Canon 100-400. There are other cases in the lens department that Nikon does not beat or match the Canon equivalent, or does not have an equivalent.

I notice this more at airshows where you can see Nikon users having Sigma lenses in a lot of cases. To me that indicates that Nikon do not have the lenses that people want at a price that they can reach.

I am a Canon user, who came to Canon from the wet film days and the one thing I have noticed is that bodies change and people buy new bodies fairly regularly whilst not getting lenses as regularly. So I stick with the company that produces the lenses I want.

In my mind Nikon has always been the camera for landscapes, portraits, etc. Whilst Canon is associated with action, wildlife, etc.

One further note is that many sports photographers here use white lenses for their action shots, so if they can earn a living using Canon then I am sure the Canon kit is good enough for me!


User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4737 posts, RR: 26
Reply 58, posted (7 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4730 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting harlequin67 (Reply 57):
There are other cases in the lens department that Nikon does not beat or match the Canon equivalent, or does not have an equivalent.

And vice versa...



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinegranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 59, posted (6 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4201 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hello

Well my 70D and accessories have now been ordered.
Should receive in the next day or two.
Just in time for the Autumn season, always great light!

My 20D still serves me well and not planning to dispose of it just yet.

Regards

Gary Watt - Granite
Airliners.net Head Screener
www.airliners.net
http://twitter.com/airliners_net


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
It Is Certainly Not The End, But...... posted Fri Dec 28 2007 07:37:08 by AKE0404AR
Will It Get Tossed To The Dogs? posted Fri Mar 10 2006 22:04:25 by SkyWestFan
American Photogs, It's Time We Take The Power Back posted Thu Mar 24 2005 00:47:05 by DLKAPA
Baddark.. Hell It Was Early In The Morning.... posted Wed Feb 16 2005 14:00:26 by StealthZ
Is It Official? Remark Responsible For More Views? posted Thu Aug 26 2010 14:48:54 by unattendedbag
The Gift Of The Database - The Career Of A Jet posted Thu Mar 23 2006 09:56:21 by Sulman
It's Official: FRA Observation Deck To Close posted Sat Jul 23 2005 22:28:36 by TS
Any Experiences On The Nikon D7100 posted Sat Mar 30 2013 22:45:38 by egondo
The Use Of Flash For Night-Time Images - Is It Safe? posted Wed Feb 13 2013 10:52:28 by Asuspine
Made It To The Topshot N Then Got Rejected... posted Thu Sep 16 2010 09:40:44 by arpitagrawal