Press Release said:
It certainly has pushed subject tracking to a new level. The only retrograde steps for me personally are the lack of AF beyond f/5.6 and the black focus point illumination....makes it very hard to see what's going on when shooting at night or against predominantly dark backgrounds.
It's with a wry smile that I remember the MkIII Extenders being announced and lauding the improvements with the impending mkII Super-telephoto's.....and now the body won't AF on two of these offerings. I've retained a 1DMkIV for the bird outings.
Indeed Bart.....I'm a much happier "bunny" now.
I guess that the newer transmissive layers on the focus screens are the issue, Asher. The new firmware pulses the illuminated focus points and I believe that the metering occurs in between the illuminated states.
Would this improve the Image quality Asher? ...I doubt it. It could improve sharpness (with some lenses) a bit ...but all other aspects of IQ? After all I don't see why 1DX is not a replacement for 1DS... it is a better camera in all aspects of photography ...no? I think that the only thing Canon (very wisely) did, is to abandon the unique to them (and stupid IMO) intermediate size sensor that they where using between FF and APS-c, ...thus saving lots of money for different parts on their bodies...
I believe that the "megapixel war" is long over Asher... Makers IMO do choose their pixel size with respect to what they want to achieve out of their designs and serve the possible target group the better they can... That said, I have the strong opinion that D800E is a well designed camera, but the D800 should have the D4 sensor in it, thus providing a better supplement to the "E" version... now it is struggling to compete internally with a superior product that aims to the same target group.
Asher,
+1... In addition, I am not sure if higher resolution sensors contribute to better photographs, in fact I am not sure that increasing sharpness as such further than it now is with respect to light sensitive areas, has any contribution at all to better pictures... IMO, "photography" is different to sharpness as long as it's not "muddy"...
Pffff.... megapixels! ...same old story! Good luck with it....Look here
47 MP, just enough to have bragging rights over Nikon!
Canon EOS 1S Rumored Specs
46.1MP (previous rumor)
5fps
16-bit RAW files
ISO 100-12800
$9,000 retail price
Could be, why not?
Asher
I don't see why any maker would what to put a slow sensor in a fast body... clearly that was a mistake in the previous generation of cameras (1ds3, d3x), if Canon would like to compete with D800E, shouldn't they choose a body in the same category that would appeal better to the market price wise? ....why would a customer pay a lot more for an overkill (to his needs) body? Besides, some where disappointed by D800's too high resolution, ...why would Canon want to disappoint a larger section of the market? ....shouldn't they "stay" near D800's analysis if they where to offer a 5diii alternative?Look here
47 MP, just enough to have bragging rights over Nikon!
Canon EOS 1S Rumored Specs
46.1MP (previous rumor)
5fps
16-bit RAW files
ISO 100-12800
$9,000 retail price
Could be, why not?
Asher
I think this is a well supported (technically) article... note that the comparison is on resolution only... no DR, or color depth or other aspect of photography, which surely doesn't benefit from smaller pixels... http://nerdycamerablog.blogspot.gr/2012/09/resolution-comparison-nikon-d800-vs.html Note that the result is that "there cannot be more benefit from resolution increase (D800 - 36mp is the limit for FF) on current imaging areas, unless there will be a further improvement in lens resolution from the best of current lenses". The article also concludes that Sinar 75 MFDB (33 mp) has (a little) more resolution than D800....
Why........?