yakim_peled1 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 http://www.arnez.ch/FM/pics/1D3.html All I can say is: OMDG! It looks like my 1D Mk I at ISO 400. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sattler123 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Wow, that's what I call impressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jean_marc_liotier Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Whoah ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serguei_fenev Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Really impressive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kari_jackson Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 as good as XTi would get - very goood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_h2 Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Wow that looks amazing Yakim. I wonder how much noise there is without neat image. Either way, no wonder Canon is the leader in ISO noise control. Uh...Kari - as good as your XTi? At what ISO? 1600 maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted March 1, 2007 Author Share Posted March 1, 2007 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DMK3/FULLRES/E1DMK3hSLI6400.HTM This is the original image. Still pretty impressive IMHO. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_r Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 ok, 6400 is pretty impressive. However, we are only seeing the III and without neat image, is this really SUCH a testament to the camera/software/etc or more to neat image...? Is Canon going to include NI in the purchase of the camera body? I doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 According to the EXIF data, this was shot at ISO 6400, image is 3888x2592 (10 MP), 1/800 at f/8, 100mm, +1/3 exposure, standard scene capture, 1DM3, exposed on 2/23/2007. I wonder if there is *any* chance this camera will sell for close to USA$ 3000 later this year? Wow.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_toro Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I think that looks horrible, for such a great body, with such a "consumer " sensor. IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suman Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Gary, are you serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 >>I wonder if there is *any* chance this camera will sell for close to USA$ 3000 later this year? Wow.<< Not a chance, not this year, not next year, not the year after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnson_d. Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Gary, care to point us to something better at this price? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd_caudle Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I can see it now: Shooting landscapes at 3200 or 6400 handheld, at small apertures, and never carrying a tripod again! Hey, a guy can dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralph_jensen Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Anthony Rhoades wrote, "Ok, 6400 is pretty impressive. However, we are only seeing the III and without neat image, is this really SUCH a testament to the camera/software/etc or more to neat image...? Is Canon going to include NI in the purchase of the camera body? I doubt." Um, Neat Image starts at 29 bucks (and goes up to $75 for the Pro-plus edition). I'm guessing that anyone who springs for a $4000 camera can spare an extra 29 bucks if they're not happy with the standard output at 6400.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_r Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Um, Neat Image starts at 29 bucks (and goes up to $75 for the Pro-plus edition). I'm guessing that anyone who springs for a $4000 camera can spare an extra 29 bucks if they're not happy with the standard output at 6400.... Um, yeah. That isn't the point. The impressiveness of the image shot with camera X and then run through neat image is the impressive part.. Not this camera. Plus, the standard output at 100 iso...still needs NI and even then. Because something looks better doesn't mean it looks good. I'll also add, having shot extensively with the IIds, I was/am disappointed. This doesn't look much better IMO. I also agree that it doesn't look good by any means...., but I still shoot film unless otherwise directed. The 'point me to something else for that price' is moot too when you can spend 20-30k and still get unsatisfactory results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_toro Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 My clients are crazy for saving every dollar and every shot. A smaller sensor with great auto focus will give me a lower quality shot. I really think a great body like this camera has shouldn't get such a small chip. I can see it in the thermometer on the upper right. I dont like the quality of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_canazzi Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Yakim - I agree that is totally amazing! Other than price, at this point in time I have to wonder why anyone would even consider any other brand of SLR digital camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pieris_berreitter Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 We have to keep in mind that high ISO images always look better when there is enough light available to guarantee short exposure times. The test and its results are only relevant to low-light sports. 1/800 at f/8 @ ISO 6400 means there is enough light available to shoot 1/90 at f/5.6 @ ISO 400. That's a lot of light, even w/o an IS lens.. the use of ISO 6400 in such a situation seems contrived to me, beyond the realm of telephoto sports shooting. Granted, sports is probably the primary market for this camera. But for people doing true low-light photography (inside churches, etc), this data is not useful. What does it look like at EV0? That would be f/1.4 at 1/60 @ ISO 6400. Probably pretty bad. ISO is just gain on the photosites, and the longer the shutter is open, the more noise accumulates. Like I said, I know it's primarily a sports camera. But every time Canon releases a camera, they show off their great "high ISO" qualities, and it's just a setup for disappointment in true low light scenarios.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_toro Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Pieres B. You got my point exactly. Nice photo ! But i will wait for the full frame sensor on the MkIII. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 <i>My clients are crazy for saving every dollar and every shot...A smaller sensor with great auto focus will give me a lower quality shot.</i><p> Who are your clients? I have a full page photo in a very slick glossy running right now that was taken with a 10D. No complaints at all about quality. Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_toro Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Let's see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I will be happy to send you a copy of the magazine, you can email me through the link from my name. I can't show you the magazine over the web, a flatbed scan isn't particularly useful. But you forgot to answer who your clients are. Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_toro Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I dont want to go there. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 So these are secret clients? I've never heard of that. And you're turning down a free magazine? Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now