New standards in performance

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by paul_b.|1, Oct 20, 2011.

  1. Holy crap! Any link to the full-res images?
  2. Is this a camera, or some sort of night vision equipment?
  3. Oliver -
    It's the newest Canon D series - ISO in trick mode to 204800 - although I haven't seen any images actually shot at that.
    From the link provided - the images at 12800 to 51200 look good, but that is on the web and downsized significantly.
  4. Thanks, David, I should have used a smiley or something to make it clear that I was just trying to make fun of the ridiculously high ISO capability.
  5. One of these days, we'll be shooting at half a million ISOs. Kind of a crazy thought isn't it?
  6. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    There is a parallel thread on the Canon EOS Forum:
    As usual, I don't judge qualtiy based on small JPEG images.
    To me, the issue with Canon sports DSLR is that they have gone from the $3500 1D Mark III (APS-H) to the $5000+ 1D Mark IV (APS-H) to the $6800 1D X (full 35mm frame). I sure hope that Nikon can stay around $5000 in their next offering.
  7. Stage lighting is a lot brighter than most people think, so I'm not overly impressed by those pix - especially at such a small size.
    But really, how much ISO do we actually need?
    The attched isn't exactly an action shot, but the shutter was fast enough to stop the Bongo player's hands. At "only" 6400 ISO, the shutter speed was a comfortable 1/125th and the aperture was nowhere near wide-open at f/7.1. And I still had 2 stops of WEP ISO in hand.
    (BTW, for those of you that have never played Combat Flight Sim; WEP stands for "War Emergency Power")
  8. What I wonder about as do my friends who shoot sports with Canon is have they got the Auto Focus problems worked out. Most of the folks I shoot with have stayed away from the MK IV and gone to the 7D instead.
    And really lets see some full size images not little web based jpgs
  9. To my eye those hands are quite blurry despite the tiny image. I would use at least 1/250s to 1/500s to get
    acceptable sharpness.

    Night clubs often have much dimmer lighting than that. I've had situations where there was no way to get sharp
    images without going to f2 or f/1.4 and ISO 3200-6400. I don't use ISO 6400 really except in the direst emergency.
    The quality I'm looking for isn't there at 6400 (D3/D700), but I have obtained good results at up to ISO 4000 when the
    exposure is perfect. If I wanted to use zooms, I would definitely want ISO 12800-25000. With primes I can make do with the "old" D3.

    The price increase reflects increased functionality/image quality, and the increased value in the eyes of the target
    market. If someone can replace both a 1Ds III and 1D Mk IV with one 1D X and can get bonus high ISO settings,
    greater fps, and improved AF and video, then it is great value. Unfortunately they will lose pixel density, AF with f/8
    maximum aperture lenses, and so there may be some (many?) who are not interested in the update.

    For me a 18MP FX camera would be perfect, since I shoot a lot at high ISO and would like more resolution for
    landscape/macro shots as well as studio portraits (and the ability to shoot at ISO 100 would be very welcome). One
    camera that can do both would save a lot of money. For me the high frame rates mean nothing; I use 9fps maybe
    twice a year and I could easily give that up. I think doing 14fps with the mirror going up and down is madness ;-) A
    solution with EVF and phase detect AF in the main sensor would be a more reasonable approach and would allow a
    far greater increase in frame rate than shown in the 1D X. I suspect that is what we will see in the D4: a hybrid
    E/OVF and very fast live view AF with frame rates close to that of the V1. Not that I will have much use for it
    personally, but there are people who will use it and record new things.
  10. [[I think doing 14fps with the mirror going up and down is madness ;-)]]
    So does Canon, which is why 14fps is only available with the mirror locked.
  11. Oh, so how will the photographer follow action - with live view?
  12. Maybe with some kinda of viewfinder like those used/placed above aquatic cameras :)
    More samples pictures here :
  13. Really, isn't it about time we ditched mirrors altogether and went fully EVF? To be honest with myself, if I want really accurate focusing then liveview is the only way. But I'd want a "picture-in-picture" screen showing a magnified focusing spot inside the full-frame, otherwise it's too slow to use all the time.

Share This Page