Uh-Oh! Canon to throw down the gauntlet! What does this mean to you, as a N-shooter?

[jake337]

I always have wondered why people think more megapixels means some sort of sales gimmick. Especially in manufacturers flagship models.

Doesn't anyone else think that the technology behind it is just getting better and better and better?


D800 comes to mind.

 

[JDFlood]

Frequently a single specification becomes a proxy for an entire product. Like amplifier and watts of power. Marketing takes it and promotes a camera ( in this instance) based on only mostly megapixels. So this is what happened for a long time. The casual consumer could make a semi-good dicision based on the number of megapixels.... The more educated customer base then put up the rebuttal that megapixel aren't every thing.... Well they arn't. But when you triple the number and accompany that with substantial improvements, without loosing ( for instance ISO performance), then it really says something. The D800 is quite an achievement, I love mine... It has significantly improved my photos. I ca also tell that I am not getting the most out of it. It is now better than many of my lenses and... Well, honestly me. But that is Ok, hopefully I can grow into it. Yeh, the technology is getting better and better! I thought digital finally bested film about five or six years ago... Now it is so far beyond that I find film a really anoying memory. I wish I had this when I was a kid... Hours in the dark room... What a waste. Can't wait for the D900... In the mean time I'll try and get as good as my D800 is. jD

 

[gsgary]

As a new Leica shooter neither lenses compare to Leica lenses

 

[Derrel]

I always have wondered why people think more megapixels means some sort of sales gimmick. Especially in manufacturers flagship models.

Doesn't anyone else think that the technology behind it is just getting better and better and better?


D800 comes to mind.

Here are a few screen caps I made today and pasted into a PSD document....Yeah....the D800 comes to mind...i n the minds of Canon executives looking for their next employment opportunity...in Canon's photocopier division...

 

[Derrel]

As a canon shooter... The specs on those things listed LOOK great, but they seem to be the sales gimmicks too. WHY do I need a 3D? For megapixels alone? I can live without 50 ISO. It's not worth it to me over the 7D or possible 7D2 which will have better high ISO ability. I can buy something to limit my low end. Can't buy anything to expand my high end.
It's about damn time they got their crap together on the focus systems.
I want to know more about dynamic range here?
This seems like the megapixel war only expanded-so far.
I'd like to see reality and testing.

I'm going to make a comment here about Dynamic Range. I bought a Nikon D3x last month. The DR on this camera's sensor is ABSOLUTELY ASTOUNDING. ANd by that I mean freaking ASTOUNDING. As in, "the ability to pull back a FOUR-stop over-exposure and make it look good." As in "damned near WHITE RAW images" shot in summer sunlight or with studio flash, that come BACK with just simple, direct Exposure MINUS slider in LR or ACR. And which look GOOD after as much as MINUS 3.75 stops of Negative Exposure!!!

As in, "the ability to use MASSIVE FILL LIGHT slider, and STILL make a great image", with a simply contrast tweak or black point adjustment or curves nudge. The D3x was the "king" of DR...some of the testing sites had it listed at 13.5 stops of DR...it is simply the SINGLE, biggest, best photographic advantage I have EVER,ever been given. The difference in the malleability of the D3x files and those of any other camera I have ever dealt with is simply S_T_A_G_G_E_R_I_N_G. it is hard to over-emphasize my sheer amazement of how far Nikon has come. I am familiar with Canon 60D and 7D and 40D and 20D and 5D Classic files, as well as Nikon and Fuji D-slr files...the D3x's sensor technology and the camera's electronics performance are simply hard to believe. The post-processing malleability of a D3x 12-bit NEF file is almost beyond my wildest dreams. And I have not yet even TRIED using the true, 14-bit NEF capabilities.

You might think Canon is doing well. Well...they are lagging.

 

[rexbobcat]

And I'll bet the actual specs are going to be disappointing compared to these...like they always are.

 

[Vautrin]

A camera is sooooo much more than MP.... Just shoot a Nikon D3100 and a D700 side by side. The 3100 has more MP, yes. But the pictures on the 700 are nicer. Why? Features. Skin tones more life like. That kind of thing that makes an "ok" photo great...

So, as a Nikon shooter, I'm happy because I want the big boys duking it out to make better progress. I'm also secretly hoping that such high megapixel cameras will either let hasselblad bring down their price, or have them throw down another gauntlet with a 200MP + camera...

But will I switch for 46 MP? No.

 

[Markw]

I was scared this was going to become a MP flame war. And we're almost there. That's not what I intended the post for. As Derrel said, the D3x's DR was astounding. The DR of the D800 is impeccable as well. Resolution from both cameras is incredible, especially from the D800. Landscapes with the 46MP, if Canon comes out with some good WAs, could be something great. But, either way, the D4's high-MP successor will rival it and will produce incredible images akin to the D3x over the D3200.

As for the 7DII, the MP were the least of the worries here. Higher video frame rates will CERTAINLY trickle over to Nikon. That's great for me. ISO range sounds fantastic, and at 10FPS (which I have NEVER used, and probably will never need. I don't care much about this one. But, it does mean that the write speed of the camera is great.) Pro-grade AF and weather sealing (not necessarily pro-grade). All good things. So, MPs notwithstanding, it still sounds like a great camera. Something that would go as a great backup to my D800 (Nikon's counterpart, of course).

Oh, and the specs are from Canonrumors. So, they should be taken with MANY grains of salt. NR does a much better, and more reliable job than CR.

Mark

 

[2WheelPhoto]

Nikon still a LOT better

 

[Tee]

Mark, I know you're a gadget geek but as a Nikon shooter, I'm curious as to why I should even care? :???: I mean, awesome to the Canon shooter but this has no bearing to my current set-up or wants and needs. The only thing this means is Canon is rolling out good camera's for their users and more Nikon VS Canon hater threads.

 

[MK3Brent]

Sup with all the megapixels...?

 

[Markw]

Mark, I know you're a gadget geek but as a Nikon shooter, I'm curious as to why I should even care? :???: I mean, awesome to the Canon shooter but this has no bearing to my current set-up or wants and needs. The only thing this means is Canon is rolling out good camera's for their users and more Nikon VS Canon hater threads.

Well, gadget geekiness aside, I need a supplement for my D800. And I want my money to go where it's best used.

Wel, your current setup is just that; your current setup. It will be replaced. And, when it's time to replace it, you'll want to know what's on the market at that time, and what will be coming up soon. That's where I'm at now, looking for a supplement. Between now and when you want to replace your setup, the industry may have changed. Your wants and interest in the art (notice the difference) may have changed. And, when that time comes, you'll be thankful you did take into account every option, and evaluate what effect that will have on the near future (of that time).

And, this will likely spark lots of comment akin to: A nice camera takes a great photograph just as a hard hammer builds a beautiful house. Well, a nicer camera does produce a file that you can pull back 4 stops of highlights and shadows then print 6' wide prints (that are still viewable from a respectable distance) like a D800. So, a great camera doesn't take great photos. But it does allow you to take more of them in more diverse, and adverse conditions. Oh, and 120fps video can only be created by a camera that can shoot, well, 120fps.

Mark

 

[toontca]

I'm personally ready for the FF d600. I don't really care what Canon comes out with unless I can use my Nikkor lenses with it.........lol

Well said sir.
Well said.

 

[Derrel]

Nikon still a LOT better

THAT type of comment is often regarded by Canon loyalists as "flame bait"...hence my actual effort above, to go and screen-cap some truly relevant photographic results to prove my point, which is that Canon is having a TOUGH GO OF IT, sensor-wise...they are getting their butts kicked by the Nikon sensors which can do on-chip noise reduction BEFORE the digital signal is run through the digital to analog converter phase...Nikon has a BETTER SYSTEM, and one that Canon does not have access to...so yeah...a 36 megapixel Nikon blows the doors off of a 22 MP Canon, at BASE ISO, with only MINOR post-provessing tweaks added to lift the shadows!!!

Canon is STILL limping along with, basically, the 5D-Mark TWO's sensor, over four years later....STILL suffering from chroma noise, and pattern noise, in HEAPS. WHo thinks Canon has a GREAT new sensor technology ready to go??? Raise your hands? Nobody? FOur years to make a MArk III that finally has a decent AF system--but has basically the same,old, warmed-over sensor as the 5D-2 had???

That "megapixel race" thing Canon was doin' has come back and bitten them on the arse...

 

[Overread]

Nikon still a LOT better

THAT type of comment is often regarded by Canon loyalists as "flame bait"...

You WERE there weren't you! At F-Stop Ridge!
Battle At F-Stop Ridge - YouTube
Battle At F-Stop Ridge 2 - YouTube

Darn Nikon Confederates!