A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Canon 50MP and Sony 42MP - who needs these cameras?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 1st 15, 07:15 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default Canon 50MP and Sony 42MP - who needs these cameras?

In article , RichA wrote:

Sandman:
Well, there was a stream of MF shooters that flocked
around the Nikon D800 when it was announced. But since then a
lot of MF cameras have worked their way towards the strengths
of the D800, like ISO.

Medium Format isn't about megapixels, at least not only. It's
about dynamic range and skin tones. And there's still a way
to go for full format cameras until they match that.

Plus, MF has so much superior glass available to them as well.
While Nikon has a lot of really nice glass, it's not
comparable to top of the line lenses from Hasselblad and the
likes.

Gary Eickmeier:
It seems to me that the main advantage of the medium format of
physical size of imager is in the area of low light photography
- but curiously studio photogs don't need that!


Sandman:
And, as I said, digital medium format cameras are notoriously bad
in low light.


Only grossly expensive ones like Hasselblad and Phase. Check out
the new Pentax.


Yes, like I *also* said, newer MF cameras have far better ISO performance. This
is still the exception, mainly because most MF cameras are still CCD.

There is (at least) one Hasselblad with a CMOS sensor as well, but I know when it
was released a lot of bladers frowned at it. CCD is a bit of a holy grail for MF
shooters.

--
Sandman
  #12  
Old July 2nd 15, 06:41 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default Canon 50MP and Sony 42MP - who needs these cameras?

In article , RichA wrote:

Sandman:
Well, there was a stream of MF shooters that
flocked around the Nikon D800 when it was announced. But
since then a lot of MF cameras have worked their way
towards the strengths of the D800, like ISO.

Medium Format isn't about megapixels, at least not only.
It's about dynamic range and skin tones. And there's
still a way to go for full format cameras until they
match that.

Plus, MF has so much superior glass available to them as
well. While Nikon has a lot of really nice glass, it's
not comparable to top of the line lenses from Hasselblad
and the likes.

Gary Eickmeier:
It seems to me that the main advantage of
the medium format of physical size of imager is in the area
of low light photography - but curiously studio photogs
don't need that!

Sandman:
And, as I said, digital medium format cameras are
notoriously bad in low light.

RichA:
Only grossly expensive ones like Hasselblad and Phase. Check
out the new Pentax.


Sandman:
Yes, like I *also* said, newer MF cameras have far better ISO
performance. This is still the exception, mainly because most MF
cameras are still CCD. There is (at least) one Hasselblad with a
CMOS sensor as well, but I know when it was released a lot of
bladers frowned at it. CCD is a bit of a holy grail for MF
shooters.


Ah the sensor debate. CCD still supposedly is a better sensor if
colour accuracy is your goal.


Which it is for any MF shooter, for obvious reasons.

There are a number of astronomy shooters who believe this and there
was one person who said (I don't know the details) that the Nikon
D5100 apparently had a very good sensor if accurately recording
colour in a scene was paramount, for astronomical images anyway.


Never heard of color accuracy being so important to astrophotographers. Dynamic
range, however, is pretty important.

For portrait photographers, the "holy CCD skin tone" is where most of the debate
is at.


--
Sandman
  #13  
Old July 2nd 15, 12:30 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Me
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 470
Default Canon 50MP and Sony 42MP - who needs these cameras?

On 2/07/2015 5:41 p.m., Sandman wrote:
In article , RichA wrote:

Sandman:
Well, there was a stream of MF shooters that
flocked around the Nikon D800 when it was announced. But
since then a lot of MF cameras have worked their way
towards the strengths of the D800, like ISO.

Medium Format isn't about megapixels, at least not only.
It's about dynamic range and skin tones. And there's
still a way to go for full format cameras until they
match that.

Plus, MF has so much superior glass available to them as
well. While Nikon has a lot of really nice glass, it's
not comparable to top of the line lenses from Hasselblad
and the likes.

Gary Eickmeier:
It seems to me that the main advantage of
the medium format of physical size of imager is in the area
of low light photography - but curiously studio photogs
don't need that!

Sandman:
And, as I said, digital medium format cameras are
notoriously bad in low light.

RichA:
Only grossly expensive ones like Hasselblad and Phase. Check
out the new Pentax.

Sandman:
Yes, like I *also* said, newer MF cameras have far better ISO
performance. This is still the exception, mainly because most MF
cameras are still CCD. There is (at least) one Hasselblad with a
CMOS sensor as well, but I know when it was released a lot of
bladers frowned at it. CCD is a bit of a holy grail for MF
shooters.


Ah the sensor debate. CCD still supposedly is a better sensor if
colour accuracy is your goal.


Which it is for any MF shooter, for obvious reasons.

There are a number of astronomy shooters who believe this and there
was one person who said (I don't know the details) that the Nikon
D5100 apparently had a very good sensor if accurately recording
colour in a scene was paramount, for astronomical images anyway.


Never heard of color accuracy being so important to astrophotographers. Dynamic
range, however, is pretty important.

For portrait photographers, the "holy CCD skin tone" is where most of the debate
is at.


Even though it's complete and utter BS.
Perhaps they'll get over it in a few years now that Hasselblad, Phase
One etc have switched new designs to CMOS.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon's 50mp DSLR. Higher res than D810, but more moire andnoise Me Digital Photography 5 May 11th 15 10:13 PM
Ken Rockwell's images from Canon's new 50MP DSLR are...peculiar! Oregonian Haruspex Digital Photography 5 March 31st 15 08:57 PM
Poor Sony. Mini review versus full reviews for warmed over Canon and Nikon APS cameras whisky-dave Digital SLR Cameras 0 April 16th 10 01:47 PM
New 50mp Hasselblad = $50k G Paleologopoulos Digital SLR Cameras 5 July 15th 08 06:55 AM
Digital Cameras Market Leaders in the U.S.: Sony, Kodak, Canon Peter Lawrence Digital Photography 0 August 9th 04 10:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.